Security Training for Surface Transportation Employees, 16456-16517 [2020-05126]
Download as PDF
16456
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
49 CFR Parts 1500, 1520, 1570, 1580,
1582, and 1584
[Docket No. TSA–2015–0001]
RIN 1652–AA55
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Security Training for Surface
Transportation Employees
section. Make sure to identify the docket
number of this rulemaking.
Transportation Security
Administration, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) is requiring
owner/operators of higher-risk freight
railroad carriers, public transportation
agencies (including rail mass transit and
bus systems), passenger railroad
carriers, and over-the-road bus
companies, to provide TSA-approved
security training to employees
performing security-sensitive functions.
The training curriculum must teach
employees how to observe, assess, and
respond to terrorist-related threats and/
or incidents. Additionally, TSA is
expanding its requirements for security
coordinators and reporting of significant
security concerns (currently limited to
rail operations) to include bus
operations within the scope of the
regulation’s applicability. TSA is
amending other provisions of its
regulations, as necessary, to implement
these requirements.
DATES:
Effective date: This rule is effective
June 22, 2020.
Compliance date: In general,
compliance schedules are indicated in
this rule. The requirements in 49 CFR
1570.201 must be met no later than July
29, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Harry Schultz (TSA, Security Policy and
Industry Engagement, Surface Division)
or David Kasminoff (TSA, Senior
Counsel, Regulations and Security
Standards) at telephone (571) 227–5563,
or email to SecurityTrainingPolicy@
tsa.dhs.gov.
SUMMARY:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Rulemaking Document
An electronic copy can be obtained
using the internet by—
(1) Searching the electronic Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS)
web page at https://www.regulations.gov;
(2) Accessing the Government
Printing Office’s web page at https://
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/
collection.action?collectionCode=FR to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
view the daily published Federal
Register edition; or accessing the
‘‘Search the Federal Register by
Citation’’ in the ‘‘Related Resources’’
column on the left, if you need to do a
Simple or Advanced search for
information, such as a type of document
that crosses multiple agencies or dates.
In addition, copies are available by
writing or calling the individual in the
Small Entity Inquiries
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires TSA to comply with small
entity requests for information and
advice about compliance with statutes
and regulations within TSA’s
jurisdiction.1 Any small entity that has
a question regarding this document may
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Persons can obtain further information
regarding SBREFA on the Small
Business Administration’s web page at
https://www.sba.gov/category/advocacynavigation-structure/regulatory-policy/
regulatory-flexibility-act/sbrefa.
Abbreviations and Terms Used in This
Document
Amtrak—National Railroad Passenger
Corporation
APTA—American Public Transportation
Association
CDL—Commercial Driver’s License
DHS—Department of Homeland Security
DOT—Department of Transportation
FRA—Federal Railroad Administration
FTA—Federal Transit Administration
GAO—U.S. Government Accountability
Office
HSA—Homeland Security Act of 2002
HTUA—High Threat Urban Area
IED—Improvised Explosive Device
MOU—Memorandum of Understanding
NSI—Nationwide Suspicious Activity
Reporting (SAR) Initiative
OMB—Office of Management and Budget
OSHA—Occupational Health and Safety
Administration
OTRB—Over-the-Road Bus
PHMSA—Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
PRA—Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
PTPR—Public Transportation and Passenger
Railroads
RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
RIA—Regulatory Impact Analysis
RSC—Rail Security Coordinator
RSSM—Rail Security-Sensitive Material
SBA—Small Business Administration
SBREFA—Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
SSI—Sensitive Security Information
TSA—Transportation Security
Administration
1 Public Law 104–121, 110 Stat. 857 (Mar. 29,
1996).
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
TSSM—Transportation Security-Sensitive
Material
UASI—Urban Area Security Initiative
UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
VBIED—Vehicle-Borne Improvised Explosive
Device
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary and Background
A. Statutory Mandate
B. Benefits of Requiring Security Training
C. Costs of This Final Rule
D. Organization of This Final Rule
II. Security Program Requirements
A. Who must provide security training?
1. Freight Railroads (§ 1580.101)
2. Public Transportation and Passenger
Railroads (§ 1582.101)
3. Over-the-Road Buses (§ 1584.101)
4. Impact on Certain Business Operations
B. Who is responsible for determining
whether a specific owner/operator is
subject to the requirements of the rule
(applicability determinations)?
(§ 1570.105)
C. Which employees must receive security
training? (§§ 1580.115(a), 1582.115(a)
and 1584.115(a))
D. How does an owner/operator determine
if someone is a security-sensitive
employee? (§§ 1580.3, 1582.3, and
1584.3)
E. Can untrained security-sensitive
employees perform security-sensitive
functions? (§§ 1580.115(b), 1582.115(b),
and 1584.115(b))
F. What topics must be included in the
security training? (§§ 1580.115(c)–(f),
1582.115(c)–(f), and 1584.115(c)–(f))
G. Who will provide the security training
curriculum? (§§ 1580.113, 1582.113, and
1584.113)?
H. Can owner/operators use pre-existing
material or other third-party material?
(§ 1570.103)
I. How do these requirements relate to
other security training required by other
Federal or State agencies?
(§§ 1580.115(c), 1582.115(c), and
1584.115(c))
J. What is the required schedule for
providing training? (§ 1570.111)
1. Initial Training (§ 1570.111(a))
2. Recurrent Training (§ 1570.111(b))
3. Previous Training (§ 1570.107)
K. Do employees have to pass a test?
((§§ 1580.113(b)(9), 1582.113(b)(9), and
1584.113(b)(9))
III. Operational Requirements (Subpart D)
A. Security Coordinator Requirements
(§ 1570.201)
B. Requirement To Report Security
Concerns (§ 1570.203)
C. Methods for Reporting Information and
Substance of Information Provided
(§ 1570.203 (a) and (c))
IV. Security Program Procedures
A. Deadlines Related to Submission and
Approval of Security Training Program
B. Amendments
1. Amendments Initiated by Owner/
Operator (§ 1570.113)
2. Amendments Initiated by TSA
(§ 1570.115)
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
C. Alternative Measures (§ 1570.117)
D. Petitions for Reconsideration
(§ 1570.119)
E. Recordkeeping Requirements
(§ 1570.121)
F. Summary of Deadlines
V. Miscellaneous Changes
A. Amendments to Part 1500
B. Amendments to Part 1503
C. Amendments to Part 1520
D. Amendments to Part 1570
1. Security Responsibilities for Employees
and Other Persons (§ 1570.7)
2. Compliance, Inspection, and
Enforcement (§ 1570.9)
3. ‘‘Covered Person’’ (§ 1570.305)
VI. Summary of Changes
VII. Response to Comments on NPRM
A. General Comments
1. Need for Rule
2. Cost of Rule
3. Stakeholder Consultation
4. Terms
B. Investigative and Enforcement
Procedures
C. Part 1570—General Rules
1. Terms Used in This Subchapter
(§ 1570.3)
2. Recognition of Prior or Established
Security Measures or Programs (§ 1570.7)
3. Submission and Approval (§ 1570.109)
4. Implementation Schedule (§ 1570.111)
5. Recordkeeping and Availability
(§ 1570.121)
6. Security Coordinator (§ 1570.201)
7. Reporting Significant Security Concerns
(§ 1570.203)
D. Subpart B—Security Programs
1. Security Training Program General
Requirements (§§ 1580.113, 1582.113,
and 1584.113)
2. Security Training and Knowledge for
Security-Sensitive Employees
(§§ 1580.115, 1582.115, and 1584.115)
E. Freight Rail Specific Issues
1. Applicability of Security Training
Requirements (§ 1580.101)
2. Chain of Custody and Control
Requirements (§ 1580.205)
F. Public Transportation and Passenger
Railroad Specific Issues
G. OTRB Specific Issues
1. Definition of Security-Sensitive
Employees (§ 1584.3 and Appendix B to
Part 1584)
2. Applicability (§ 1584.101)
H. Comments Beyond Scope of Rulemaking
VIII. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
B. Economic Impact Analyses
1. Regulatory Impact Analysis Summary
2. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
13711 Assessments
3. OMB A–4 Statement
4. Alternatives Considered
5. Regulatory Flexibility Assessment
6. International Trade Impact Assessment
7. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
C. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
D. Environmental Analysis
E. Energy Impact Analysis
I. Executive Summary and Background
A. Statutory Mandate
Following the attacks of September
11, 2001, Congress created TSA under
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
the Aviation and Transportation
Security Act (ATSA) and established the
agency’s primary Federal role to
enhance security for all modes of
transportation.2 The scope of TSA’s
authority includes assessing security
risks, developing security measures to
address identified risks, and enforcing
compliance with these measures.3 TSA
also has broad regulatory authority to
issue, rescind, and revise regulations as
necessary to carry out its transportation
security functions.4
As part of the Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act of 2007 (9/11 Act),5
Congress mandated regulations to
enhance surface transportation security
through security training of frontline
employees. The mandate includes
prescriptive requirements for who must
be trained, what the training must
encompass, and how to submit and
obtain approval for a training program.6
The 9/11 Act also mandates regulations
requiring higher-risk railroads and overthe-road buses (OTRBs) to appoint
security coordinators.7 In addition to
implementing these provisions, this
final rule also addresses a mandate to
define Transportation Security-Sensitive
Materials.8
B. Benefits of Requiring Security
Training
TSA is issuing this rule pursuant to
its authority and responsibility over the
security of the nation’s transportation
systems. TSA fulfills its transportation
security mission in partnership with its
industry and government stakeholders.
As noted in the 2018 National Strategy
2 Public Law 107–71, 115 Stat. 597 (Nov. 19,
2001). ATSA created TSA as a component of the
Department of Transportation (DOT). Section 403(2)
of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (HSA), Public
Law 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135 (Nov. 25, 2002),
transferred all functions related to transportation
security, including those of the Secretary of
Transportation and the Under Secretary of
Transportation for Security, to the Secretary of
Homeland Security. Pursuant to DHS Delegation
Number 7060.2, the Secretary delegated to the
Administrator, subject to the Secretary’s guidance
and control, the authority vested in the Secretary
with respect to TSA, including the authority in sec.
403(2) of the HSA.
3 See 49 U.S.C. 114, which codified section 101
of ATSA.
4 49 U.S.C. 114(l)(1).
5 Public Law 110–53, 121 Stat. 266 (Aug. 3, 2007).
6 See secs. 1408, 1517, and 1534 of the 9/11 Act,
codified at 6 U.S.C. 1137, 1167, and 1184,
respectively.
7 See secs. 1512 and 1531 of the 9/11 Act,
codified at 6 U.S.C. 1162 and 1181, respectively.
TSA addresses 1512(e)(1)(A) and 1531(e)(1)(A) in
this rulemaking. TSA intends to address the other
regulatory requirements of these provisions in
separate rulemakings.
8 See sec. 1501 of the 9/11 Act, codified at 6
U.S.C. 1151.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16457
for Counterterrorism in the United
States:
The critical infrastructure of the United
States—much of which is privately owned—
provides the essential goods and services that
drive American prosperity. Coordinated
efforts are, therefore, necessary to strengthen
and maintain secure and resilient critical
infrastructure and to prepare Americans to
respond appropriately should an attack
occur. By integrating and improving
preparedness across all levels of government
as well as the private and public sectors, we
will stop terrorists from undermining our
security and prosperity.9
Consistent with this strategy, the
purpose of this rule is to solidify the
baseline of security for higher-risk
surface transportation operations by
improving and sustaining the
preparedness of surface transportation
employees in higher-risk operations,
including their critical capability to
observe, assess, and respond to security
risks and potential security breaches
within their unique working
environment. In developing this
rulemaking, TSA recognizes private
sector capabilities, voluntary initiatives,
and other Federal requirements to raise
security within distinct surface
transportation operations. By integrating
these efforts, setting a national standard
for surface transportation employee
security training, and ensuring this
training is sustained across higher-risk
operations, this rule promotes national
security in alignment with the intent of
the 9/11 Act and the National Strategy.
The rule accomplishes this purpose
by requiring higher-risk public
transportation systems, railroad carriers
(passenger and freight), and OTRB
owner/operators to prepare and train
their employees performing securitysensitive job functions. Through
security training, employees will have
the capability to identify, report, and
appropriately react to suspicious
activity, suspicious items, dangerous
substances, and security incidents that
may be associated with terrorist
reconnaissance, preparation, or action.
TSA believes this training may be the
critical point for preventing a terrorist
act and mitigating the consequences.
In order to ensure effective
communication regarding threats (both
to regulated parties and from regulated
parties), TSA is also expanding
applicability of current requirements for
rail operations to have security
coordinators and report security
incidents to TSA. With this rulemaking,
9 See The White House, National Strategy for
Counterterorrism in the United States, at 19 (Oct.
2018), available at https://www.dni.gov/files/NCTC/
documents/news_documents/NSCT.pdf (last
accessed Nov. 26, 2018) (National Strategy).
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16458
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
the applicability for this requirement is
expanded to include any owner/
operator required to provide security
training. Requiring higher-risk owner/
operators to have security coordinators
and report significant security concerns
to TSA will enhance TSA’s ability to
recognize trends and communicate
directly with individuals within higherrisk operations that have direct
responsibility for security.
C. Costs of This Final Rule
Table 1 identifies TSA’s estimates for
the overall cost of this rule.
TABLE 1—COST OF FINAL RULE
Estimated costs
(over 10 years,
discounted at 7
percent)
Freight Railroads ..............
Public Transportation and
Passenger Railroads
(PTPRs).
OTRBs ..............................
TSA ..................................
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Total ..........................
$25.09 million.
17.12 million.
8.06 million.
2.03 million.
52.30 million.
D. Organization of This Final Rule
Subchapter D of chapter XII of title
49, ‘‘Maritime and Surface
Transportation Security’’ 10 (Subchapter
D), includes security program
requirements for surface transportation,
including the requirements in this final
rule. Before this final rule, Subchapter
D included requirements relevant to two
vetting programs (the Transportation
Worker Identification Credential (TWIC)
and Hazmat Material Endorsement
(HME), as well as certain rail security
requirements, including chain of
custody for Rail Security-Sensitive
Materials (RSSM), appointment of
security coordinators, and reporting
security issues.
This final rule (1) adds requirements
for security training for certain surface
transportation owner/operators; (2)
expands applicability of the security
coordinator and reporting security issue
requirements to include higher-risk bus
operations; and (3) adds other
miscellaneous provisions necessary for
implementation of a new regulatory
program.
To incorporate these new elements,
TSA is organizing Subchapter D as
follows.
• Part 1570 is divided into four
subparts: (1) Subpart A includes
requirements generally applicable to all
10 TSA is modifying the title of this subchapter,
changing it from ‘‘Maritime and Land
Transportation Security’’ to ‘‘Maritime and Surface
Transportation Security.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
aspects of subchapter D; (2) subpart B
includes security program requirements
consistently relevant to multiple modes;
(3) subpart C includes operational
requirements consistently applicable to
multiple modes; and (4) subpart D
moves and consolidates general
provisions related to security threat
assessments (STAs) which are more
specifically addressed in part 1572. As
noted below, mode-specific
requirements are contained in
subsequent parts.
• Part 1580 is modified to limit
requirements applicable to rail security.
This part includes operational
requirements unique to freight railroads
and rail hazardous materials shippers/
receivers (such as chain of custody) 11
and modal-specific security training
requirements for freight railroads. The
requirements for appointment of
security coordinators and reporting
security issues are moved to part 1570
and several definitions are moved to
part 1500.
• Part 1582, a new part entitled
‘‘Public Transportation and Passenger
Railroad Security,’’ includes modalspecific security training requirements
for public transportation system and
passenger railroads (PTPR). The
requirements for appointment of
security coordinators and reporting
security issues applicable to PTPR rail
operations are moved to part 1570 and
several definitions are moved to part
1500.
• Part 1584, a new part entitled,
‘‘Highway and Motor Carrier Security,’’
includes modal-specific security
training requirements for OTRB owner/
operators.
Owner/operators subject to the
requirements of this final rule will need
to address the requirements in part 1570
as well as the requirements applicable
to their respective mode in parts 1582
through 1584. Sections II through IV,
which follow, provide a comprehensive
discussion of these requirements as they
will be implemented, rather than a
sequential section-by-section analysis.
Section II addresses general
programmatic requirements, including:
Applicability determinations, which
employees must be trained, content of
training, and the required training
schedule. Section III discusses
operational requirements, such as the
requirement for security coordinators
and reporting of security incidents.
Section IV provides the procedural
requirements for submission and
approval of a security training program,
amendments to the program, and
11 See Rail Transportation Security Final Rule
(Rail Security Rule), 73 FR 72130, (Nov. 26, 2008).
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
recordkeeping requirements. This
section also includes a table that
summarizes the compliance deadlines
owner/operators must meet. Section V
discusses other revisions to TSA’s
regulations that result from adding these
new requirements to Subchapter D.12
This final rule includes TSA’s
responses to comments received on the
NPRM. Section VI includes a chart
summarizing the minimal changes
between the NPRM and final rule.
Section VII provides TSA’s responses to
comments on the NPRM.
Section VIII includes the rulemaking
analysis and notices. This analysis
includes any changes in the impact
estimates between the NPRM and the
final rule and the basis for those
changes.
II. Security Program Requirements
A. Who must provide security training?
Consistent with TSA’s commitment to
a risk-based approach to transportation
security, the requirements of this rule
only apply to higher-risk operations. A
higher-risk operation is one that meets
the criteria in §§ 1580.101 (freight
railroads), 1582.101 (PTPR), and
1584.101 (OTRB). These criteria are
used to identify operations with a
relatively higher-risk of being targeted
or used by terrorists. While there are
approximately 10,000 surface
transportation operations,
approximately 300 of them currently
meet the criteria.13
While the requirements of this rule
are limited to higher-risk operations,
TSA encourages all owner/operators to
consider implementing the security
training program required by this rule,
modified and adapted to their
operations, as appropriate. TSA will
ensure resources developed for
regulated owner/operators, such as
TSA-created training materials, are
available to owner/operators of nonhigher-risk operations who are
committed to enhancing security
through improving the security
awareness of employees.
TSA’s applicability criteria for freight
railroads, PTPR, OTRB, and certain
business operations are as follows.
1. Freight Railroads (§ 1580.101)
A freight railroad owner/operator
must provide security training if it is: (a)
12 The discussion does not address provisions
that are moved, as discussed above, but not
modified.
13 A full discussion of TSA’s analysis and
considerations in making its determination and
developing the applicability criteria can be found
in the NPRM. See 81 FR at 91355 et seq. (section
III.F. of the NPRM).
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Designated as Class I; 14 (b) transports
RSSM in one or more of the areas listed
in current Appendix A to 49 CFR part
1580; 15 and/or (c) hosts a higher-risk
rail operation (including freight
railroads and the intercity or commuter
systems identified in § 1582.101). The
flowchart in Figure 1 summarizes when
a freight railroad owner/operator must
provide security training and when this
training is recommended by TSA. TSA
estimates the requirements of this rule
currently apply to 33 freight railroads.
2. Public Transportation and Passenger
Railroads (§ 1582.101)
3. Over-the-Road Buses (§ 1584.101)
An OTRB owner/operator must
provide security training if it provides
fixed-route service to, through, or from
any of ten areas identified in 49 CFR
part 1584, Appendix A. These ten areas
receive the highest funding allocation
under the FY 2018 Urban Area Security
Initiative (UASI) grant program (87
percent of the total available funding).16
TSA estimates that this rule will apply
to approximately 205 OTRB owner/
operators.
The determining factor for whether a
fixed-route OTRB owner/operator is
within the scope of the rule is not where
they are headquartered, but where they
provide service. In deciding to rely on
where the owner/operator provides
service, rather than corporate
headquarters locations, TSA considered
factors that could make an OTRB a
potential target for a terrorist attack,
including (1) its visibility (the size of its
operations); (2) the extent to which its
schedule is publicly available; (3)
whether or not it is relatively easy for
unknown individuals to board the bus;
(4) and whether the bus will have ease
of access to high-consequence locations.
TSA is aware that some private
companies provide commuter services
that may trigger applicability of the rule.
Figure 2 provides a flowchart to assist
companies with determining if the
security training requirements apply.
16 UASI funds are allocated based on a risk
methodology employed by DHS and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). For the
list of UASI allocations for the FY 2018 UASI grant
program, which is administered by FEMA as part
of the larger Homeland Security Grant Program, see
the FY 2018 Homeland Security Grant Program
Notice of Funding Opportunity, Appendix A at
https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/
1526578809767-7f08f471f36d22b2c
0d8afb848048c96/FY_2018_HSGP_NOFO_FINAL_
508.pdf.
A public transportation agency or
passenger railroad must provide
security training if it is (a) one of the 46
identified PTPR systems listed in 49
CFR part 1582, Appendix A; (b) Amtrak;
or (c) hosts a higher-risk freight railroad.
DHS consistently identifies the eight
regions where the 46 systems operate as
having the highest transit-specific risk.
Applying the rule’s requirements to
these systems corresponds to providing
enhanced security for more than 80
percent of all PTPR passengers.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
16459
14 The Surface Transportation Board defines a
Class I railroad as one with annual operating
revenue in excess of $447,621,226 (adjusted for
inflation).
15 See § 1580.3 for definition of RSSM.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
ER23MR20.000
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
4. Impact on Certain Business
Operations
Parent corporations and subsidiaries.
While the criteria for higher-risk
determinations presumes similarities for
operations within each mode,17 TSA
recognizes there are other
considerations that could affect
applicability, particularly related to
subsidiaries. As discussed in section
III.F of the NPRM,18 TSA is limiting the
requirements to the level of the
subsidiary whose operations fit the
applicability criteria identified in the
rule.
During the review and approval
process of the security training program,
TSA will work with owner/operators to
address any compliance issues based on
corporate structure. For example,
owner/operator A may be organized to
make each regional area a separate
subsidiary. As such, only the subsidiary
that meets the applicability
requirements must develop a security
training program. Owner/operator B
may be a single entity for purposes of
corporate-legal structure with branches,
rather than subsidiaries, providing
service on specific routes. Under this
rule, the entire corporation is subject to
the requirements based on the
operations of one route. In this
17 See discussion on applicability at 81 FR 91355
et seq. (sec. III.F. of NPRM).
18 81 FR at 91355.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
situation, owner/operator B could
choose to submit a proposed alternative
to limit application of the requirements
to branches and a handful of
headquarters or other regional
employees that provide operational
support. The submission requirements
and procedures for requesting
alternative measures are discussed in
section IV.
Foreign owner/operators. While the
applicability provisions for security
training do not specifically reference
foreign owner/operators, the
requirements apply to employees
performing a security-sensitive function
‘‘. . . in the United States or in direct
support of the common carriage of
persons or property between a place in
the United States and any place outside
the United States.’’ Therefore, the
training requirements of this rule apply
to both domestic owner/operators and
foreign owner/operators with employees
performing covered functions within the
United States or in support of
operations within the United States. For
example, the rule may apply to a
Canadian OTRB owner/operator offering
fixed-route service that begins at a point
in Canada and transits through an area
identified in part 1584, Appendix A
before concluding at a point in Mexico.
Even if only one employee (for example,
the driver), performs a security-sensitive
function while physically in the United
States, applicability is triggered by the
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
route. The Canadian OTRB owner/
operator would be required to have a
security training program and provide
the required training to the driver and
any other employee performing a
security-sensitive function that supports
the operations transiting through higherrisk regions in the United States (such
as individuals providing maintenance or
inspection services and dispatch
information applicable to the covered
route). Once applicability is triggered, it
is irrelevant where the OTRB owner/
operator’s company is located or where
the function is being performed
(whether the employee is performing
the security-sensitive function at a
location in Canada or along the route in
the United States).
In addition, while foreign owner/
operators providing service in the
United States are required to have a
security coordinator and alternate,
foreign owner/operators are only
required to report potential threats and
significant security concerns for
operations in the United States or
transportation to, from, or within the
United States. A similar requirement
currently applies to foreign freight
railroad owner/operators under 49 CFR
part 1580. This approach is also
consistent with that taken by the
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).
Hosting relationships. TSA recognizes
that joint operations are common within
the rail industry and include agreements
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
ER23MR20.001
16460
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
such as hosting. In a hosting
relationship, the ‘‘host railroad’’ owns
the track and exercises operational
control of the movement of trains of
other railroads (the ‘‘tenant’’ railroads)
while they are using that track.
Under this rule, both the host and
tenant railroads are required to have a
training program that appropriately
addresses the ramifications of the
hosting relationship. For example, the
host railroad’s training program will
need to address the operational
considerations of the hosting
relationship, such as training
dispatchers on their role and
responsibilities in halting the tenant
railroad’s operations over a segment of
track where there is a potential threat
(such as a suspected improvised
explosive device (IED) or tampering
with infrastructure). Similarly, a tenant
railroad subject to the security training
requirements of 49 CFR part 1582
(PTPR), will need to address the
operational considerations of the
hosting relationship, such as instructing
its train and engine employees on the
proper communication procedures to
follow when a potential threat is
identified. Under either example, the
host and tenant railroad owner/
operators are only responsible for
training their own employees.
Contracted services. Contracted
services may involve joint operation
pursuant to specific terms, but are
different from hosting relationships. For
example, some commuter passenger
train services are owned by public
transportation agencies, but the agency
has a contract with a private company
(such as a freight railroad) to operate the
train. This is not a hosting relationship.
When inspecting compliance by
participants in this type of a contracted
services agreement, TSA will consider
the freight railroad carrier (the private
company/contractor) to be an
authorized representative of the PTPR
owner/operator (the owner/operator of
the passenger train service). TSA will
hold the PTPR owner/operator primarily
responsible for compliance and for
ensuring that all security-sensitive
employees receive the required training,
whether they are employed directly by
the PTPR owner/operator or contractor.
The PTPR owner/operator must train
the freight railroad carrier’s employees
performing security-sensitive functions
related to the passenger train service.
To the extent the contract between the
PTPR owner/operator and the freight
railroad includes a provision for the
freight railroad to train its own
employees, the passenger operation is
responsible for documenting satisfaction
of the training requirements within its
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
TSA-approved-security training
program. TSA will expect the passenger
operation to clearly state in its security
training program, as part of the
submission process under 49 CFR
1570.109, that the freight railroad carrier
will conduct the training and provide
the required information on that
training.
Regardless of how the parties define
who will do what, TSA has authority to
inspect both parties’ operations for
compliance. The regulated party is
primarily responsible, but TSA has
authority to initiate enforcement actions
for non-compliance against either party
based upon a fact-specific
determination. While TSA historically
initiates enforcement actions against the
regulated entity, we have begun to look
more closely at authorized
representative/contractual relationships
in our effort to address the root cause of
noncompliance.
B. Who is responsible for determining
whether a specific owner/operator is
subject to the requirements of the rule
(applicability determinations)?
(§ 1570.105)
Owner/operators are required to use
the criteria in 49 CFR parts 1580, 1582,
and 1584 (contained in a subpart B to
each part) to determine whether their
operations are higher-risk. If the
operations meet the criteria, the
requirements of this rule apply. Under
§ 1570.105(a), owner/operators must
notify TSA within 30 days of the
effective date of this final rule if they
meet the criteria for applicability. This
obligation also applies to new and
modified operations (commencing after
publication of the final rule). Under
§ 1570.105(b), owner/operators must
notify TSA no later than 90 calendar
days before commencing operations or
implementing modifications triggering
applicability of the requirements.
While the rule requires owner/
operators to determine whether the
criteria apply, TSA is aware of the
operations that are likely to be within
the scope of applicability. TSA may
initiate a compliance investigation if an
owner/operator fails to self-identify
within the required period.
To mitigate the likelihood of an
owner/operator failing to comply based
upon lack of recognition of the
applicability for these requirements,
TSA will use a variety of
communication strategies to notify
regulated parties that are likely to meet
the applicability criteria. For example,
TSA will use email to immediately
notify its key stakeholder points of
contact regarding publication of this
final rule. In addition to these
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16461
established information sharing
mechanisms, TSA also conducts regular
calls, workshops, and meetings with
major industry partners and trade
associations. TSA’s surface
representatives also work closely with
surface-system owner/operators during
industry-led security work groups,
conferences, roundtables, and other
sector-specific government coordination
meetings. TSA plans to use all of these
mechanisms to notify relevant industry
partners of the new requirements.
C. Which employees must receive
security training? (§§ 1580.115(a),
1582.115(a) and 1584.115(a))
Any owner/operator required to have
a security training program under
§§ 1580.101, 1582.101, or 1584.101,
must provide security training to all
security-sensitive employees. Securitysensitive employees include any direct
employee, contractor, employee of a
contractor, or other authorized person
who is compensated for performing a
security-sensitive function on behalf of
or for the benefit of the owner/
operator.19 For example, if an OTRB
owner/operator does not employ any
drivers directly, but uses drivers under
contract, these drivers will need to be
trained. Similarly, if an owner/operator
has chosen to combine dispatch services
with any affiliates of its parent
corporation, the owner/operator
required to provide security training to
its direct employees will also be
required to provide security training to
any dispatchers providing services for
its fleet.
D. How does an owner/operator
determine if someone is a securitysensitive employee? (§§ 1580.3, 1582.3,
and 1584.3)
Definitions of mode-specific
‘‘security-sensitive employees’’ are
included in §§ 1580.3 (freight rail),
1582.3 (PTPR), and 1584.3 (OTRB), with
additional detail regarding job functions
provided in mode-specific tables
published as appendices to parts 1580,20
1582, and 1584. As discussed in section
III.E. of the NPRM, ‘‘security-sensitive
employees’’ are individuals who
perform functions with a direct nexus
to, or impact on, transportation
19 See § 1570.3 for the definition of an
‘‘employee.’’
20 The table in part 1580 Appendix B is unique
in that it includes examples of the job titles related
to these functions based on historic use of these
terms for railroads. The job titles, however, are
provided solely as a resource to help understand
the functions described; whether an employee must
be trained is based upon the function, not the job
title.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
16462
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
security.21 These functions fall into the
following categories: (1) Operating a
vehicle; inspecting and maintaining
vehicles; (2) inspecting or maintaining
building or transportation
infrastructure; (3) controlling dispatch
or movement of vehicles; (4) providing
security of the owner/operator’s
equipment and property; (5) loading or
unloading cargo or baggage; (6)
interacting with travelling public (on
board a vehicle or within a
transportation facility); and (7)
complying with security programs or
measures, including those required by
Federal law (a catch-all category that
includes a small number of employees
such as security coordinators and any
other individuals who may have
responsibility for carrying out aspects of
the owner/operator’s security program
or other security measures who are not
otherwise identified in the previous
categories).
The requirements also apply to
managers, supervisors, or others who
perform a security-sensitive function or
who so directly supervise the
performance of such a function that
their nexus is equivalent to the securitysensitive employee.22 For example, a
yardmaster in freight railroad operations
is considered a security-sensitive
employee because he or she directs
security-sensitive functions, even if not
in the direct management chain of all
individuals performing these functions.
At the same time, individuals within a
corporate structure who neither perform
a security-sensitive function nor have
direct management responsibilities over
individuals who do are unlikely to have
a position within the corporation with
a significant nexus to the transportation
operations of the business (such as
accounting functions). To the extent
there are such individuals in the
management structure, they will not be
considered ‘‘security-sensitive’’
employees.
In some circumstances, securitysensitive functions may be performed by
individuals not within the definition of
‘‘employee.’’ For example, police
officers employed by a local law
enforcement agency may be routinely
patrolling the owner/operator’s
premises and/or operations, but do not
work directly for, or under contract to,
the owner/operator. Owner/operators
are not required to provide training to
these individuals. To the extent,
however, these individuals work in the
21 See
81 FR at 91353 et seq. for more information
on how TSA identifies these employees and how
the chosen functions align with requirements in the
9/11 Act.
22 The definition of ‘‘employee,’’ which is in
§ 1570.3, includes immediate supervisors.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
same environment as security-sensitive
employees, TSA encourages owner/
operators to make their training
materials and sessions available.
Providing awareness of training content
to local law enforcement personnel
regularly assigned to patrols at locations
where security-sensitive employees
work can enhance communication and
cooperation in response to potential
threats or actual terrorist-related
incidents.
The law enforcement agency or
personnel may be considered securitysensitive employees of the owner/
operator if, for example, there is a
contractual relationship for the law
enforcement agency to provide services
to the owner/operator and the law
enforcement officer is assigned to that
location by the owner/operator.
Similarly, where the owner/operator has
a dedicated police or security force who
are employees of the owner/operator,
these individuals are security-sensitive
employees who must be trained under
this rule.
TSA encourages owner/operators to
consider other employees within their
corporate structure or business
operations who may not be performing
a security-sensitive function as
identified in the rule, but who could
provide an additional layer of security
if they received security training.
Furthermore, if an owner/operator
identifies positions or functions not
listed by TSA as security-sensitive, but
which have the nexus to transportation
security that is intended to be covered
by the rule, TSA encourages the owner/
operator to identify and include these
employees within its security training
program.
E. Can untrained security-sensitive
employees perform security-sensitive
functions? (§§ 1580.115(b), 1582.115(b),
and 1584.115(b))
If a security-sensitive employee does
not receive the required security
training, this employee is prohibited
from performing a security-sensitive
function without the direct supervision
of an employee who has met the
training requirements applicable to that
security-sensitive function. While TSA
is not defining ‘‘direct,’’ TSA expects
the supervisor to be located in
reasonable proximity to the employee to
supervise actions and provide the
necessary level of security awareness
and response capabilities.
Furthermore, even if an employee is
directly supervised, TSA imposes a 60day limit for the amount of time that an
employee may perform a securitysensitive function without completing
the required training. After 60 days, the
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
rule requires the owner/operator to
remove the employee from a securitysensitive function. This requirement
does not affect the owner/operators’
discretion to reassign the individual to
other non-security-sensitive job
functions.
F. What topics must be included in the
security training? (§§ 1580.115(c)–(f),
1582.115(c)–(f), and 1584.115(c)–(f))
TSA is requiring a training program
that focuses on the specific knowledge
provided to security-sensitive
employees related to preparedness,
observation, assessment and response.
As a key aspect of security awareness is
the ability to detect anomalies in the
operating environment, the rule affords
flexibility for owner/operators to
develop and implement a program that
addresses the above-required
components in the context of their
unique operational environments.
The ‘‘prepare’’ category addresses
training on discharging any security
responsibilities that security-sensitive
employees may have under an owner/
operator’s existing security plan or
security measure. This rule does not
require any owner/operator to adopt or
implement a security plan or measures,
but TSA is aware that many owner/
operators have security plans or
measures implemented to comply with
Federal requirements, to qualify for
Federal grants, or as the result of
voluntary initiatives. To the extent these
plans or procedures exist, employees
must be trained in order to ensure they
are effective. Similar to the threat and
incident prevention and response
training, this portion of the training
program will need to be tailored to the
specific operation.
The ‘‘prepare’’ element provides
multiple benefits to transportation
security and to owner/operators. First,
the requirement recognizes that the time
when a crisis is occurring is not the time
to provide training on how to
implement crisis-response measures.
Employees need to be prepared in
advance, especially if they have
responsibilities related to responding to
a terrorist incident in order to mitigate
the consequences. Second, this training
element ensures that training conducted
under this rule meets all of the
requirements for security training
required for ‘‘hazmat employees’’ under
49 CFR 172.704(a)(5).23 Third, this
23 An analysis of the relationship between the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) required training and the
training provided by this final rule can be found in
Diagram B of the NPRM. See 81 FR at 91364. The
relation with other training is also discussed in
section II.H. and I. of this preamble.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
element also captures specific training
for freight railroads related to the
requirements in § 1580.115(c) for chain
of custody and control requirements,
ensuring appropriate procedures are
followed to comply with the security
requirements in subpart C to part 1580
(which contains the requirements
moved from §§ 1580.103 and 1580.107
as a result of this rulemaking).
Finally, the ‘‘prepare’’ category
captures training that may vary based on
the specific nature of an employee’s
responsibilities. For example,
appropriate methods of self-defense may
vary based upon an employee’s job and
extent to which he or she interacts with
the public. Similarly, an employee’s
need to be trained in how to operate and
maintain security equipment may be
dictated by the employee’s
responsibilities. Within this category,
owner/operators have some flexibility to
shape the training to be appropriate for
their specific employees and operations.
This flexibility allows owner/operators
to avoid situations where employees are
required to sit through training
completely irrelevant to their roles and
responsibilities.
TSA intends for the training required
in the Observe, Assess, and Respond
categories to be relevant to all
employees, regardless of their job
functions. Training in security
awareness and behavior recognition is
appropriate for all employees and TSA
believes there should be a common level
of proficiency on these issues among
security-sensitive employees of the
owner/operators.
The ‘‘observe’’ category is intended to
provide knowledge to increase a
security-sensitive employee’s
observational skills. In general, this
training focuses on recognizing the
difference between what is normal for
the operational environment and
abnormalities that could indicate
terrorist planning or imminent attack.
Training delivered should teach the
employees that suspicious activity is a
combination of actions and individual
behaviors that appear strange,
inconsistent, or out of the ordinary for
the employee’s work environment. In
most instances, it will not be a single
factor, but a combination of factors
taking place at a particular time and
place, that will accurately identify a
suspicious individual or act.
The ‘‘assess’’ category requires
providing knowledge of how to
determine the most appropriate
response to what is observed. For
example, does the incident require a
response and, if so, what is the
appropriate response?
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
The ‘‘respond’’ category includes
training on security incident
responses—including how to
appropriately report a security threat,
interact with the public and first
responders at the scene of a threat or
incident, applicable uses of self-defense
devices or protective equipment, and
communication with passengers. In
addition to meeting training
requirements enumerated in the 9/11
Act,24 this category is intended to
provide elements of security awareness
training required by 49 CFR
172.704(a)(4). To the extent owner/
operators need to provide training on
specific self-defense devices or
protective equipment, TSA has not
calculated these costs. Such training is
not a cost of this rule based on an
assumption that training on the use of
self-defense devices and equipment is a
standard part of any operation before
providing such devices or equipment to
individuals.
TSA recognizes that owner/operators
may choose, or have chosen, to integrate
varying levels of training into their
security training programs, such as for
particular categories of employees or job
functions, to meet the objectives of their
overall security program or plan. As
noted in section I, TSA intends for this
rule to establish and solidify the
baseline of security for higher-risk
surface transportation operations. To the
extent an owner/operator has a program
that goes beyond the required baseline,
TSA encourages continuation of these
efforts as long as the owner/operator can
meet the minimum training required by
this rule for all security-sensitive
employees.
G. Who will provide the security training
curriculum? (§§ 1580.113, 1582.113,
and 1584.113)?
Owner/operators are required to train
security-sensitive employees using
curriculum approved by TSA. TSA
assumes that many of the owner/
operators required to provide security
training under this rule already have
training programs in place that may
substantially comply with the rule’s
requirements. This assumption is based
on TSA’s involvement in allocations of
grant funding to owner/operators for the
development of security training
materials, funded through various DHSgrant program appropriations, as well as
a comprehensive review of available
training materials to determine whether
24 Diagram B in the NPRM, Development
Considerations for Requirements in §§ 1580.113,
1582.113, and 1584.11, provides an analysis of the
9/11 Act’s requirements and other considerations
incorporated into the four categories of training
required by this rule. See 81 FR at 91364.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16463
they meet the standards and criteria
required by the 9/11 Act. This
assumption is also bolstered by certain
industry responses to TSA’s Notice
published in 2013 in which TSA sought
public comment and data on current
security training practices.25
TSA is committed to mitigating the
costs of training for all owner/operators
through several initiatives. For example,
TSA has, and will continue, to identify
existing training materials that address
the curriculum content requirements
identified in the rule and will make this
information available to regulated
parties.26 TSA is also developing
training materials that meet specific
training requirements in this rule. TSA
will notify regulated parties as the
relevant training materials are
completed.
H. Can owner/operators use pre-existing
material or other third-party material?
(§ 1570.103)
This rule does not require the owner/
operator to create their own material or
impose limits on the use of third-party
material. If, however, owner/operators
choose to rely on previously prepared
training material, including material
developed to satisfy other regulatory
requirements, or third-party material,
they must incorporate that material into
an appendix to their security training
program and reference that appendix in
the corresponding portions of their
security program, as discussed below.
I. How do these requirements relate to
other security training required by other
Federal or State agencies?
(§§ 1580.115(c), 1582.115(c), and
1584.115(c))
TSA recognizes that many owner/
operators covered by this rule are
subject to training requirements under
regulations of the Department of
Transportation (DOT) that overlap with
the training content required in the 9/
11 Act.27 TSA does not expect owner/
operators to duplicate training. To the
extent that an owner/operator intends to
use existing training programs
25 See Request for Comments on Security Training
Programs for Surface Mode Employees, 78 FR
35945, 35948 (June 14, 2013) (discussion on grantfunded training programs under ‘‘Relation to Other
Training Programs’’). TSA summarizes the response
to the 2013 Notice in this final rule’s RIA, Section
1.5. TSA explains in Sections 1.8.2. and 1.8.3. of the
RIA how it used information from the responses to
the 2013 Notice to assess the level of training in the
baseline for PTPR and OTRB owner/operators,
respectively.
26 See, e.g., Example of Security Training Matrix
(TSA–2013–0005–0084) available in the docket to
this rulemaking at www.regulations.gov.
27 See sections III.G.5 and I of NPRM for a
discussion of other related training. 81 FR at 91361–
91362 and 91364 et seq.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16464
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
implemented to comply with other
Federal requirements or other standards
in order to satisfy some or all of the
requirements of this rule, the program
submitted to TSA for approval must
identify how the owner/operators
intends to use the other training to
satisfy TSA’s requirements, such as the
curriculum or lesson plan for that
program. TSA intends to maintain an
iterative list available to regulated
owner/operators of training programs
that have been approved by TSA for use
in meeting this rule’s requirements.
Paragraph (c)(2) requires an index to
be provided if the owner/operator
chooses to submit all or part of an
existing security training program to
TSA for approval. The index must be
organized in the same sequence as the
content requirements in §§ 1580.115,
1582.115, and 1584.115. Indexing is a
necessary requirement if TSA is to
provide flexibility for owner/operators
to use existing training programs to
satisfy this rule. TSA may request
additional information on the program
through the review and approval
process.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
J. What is the required schedule for
providing training? (§ 1570.111)
1. Initial Training (§ 1570.111(a))
Current employees must be trained
within one year of TSA’s approval of the
security training program. Initial
training for new employees or those
transitioning to a covered job function
(as identified in Appendix B to parts
1580 (freight rail), 1582 (PTPR), and
1584 (OTRB)), must occur within the
first 60 days of the date an employee
begins to perform a security-sensitive
function. In general, this means that an
employee must be trained within 60
days of starting in a permanentemployment position that may require
performance of a security-sensitive
function, whether full or part-time.28
Section 1570.111(a)(3) addresses nonpermanent employees. Non-permanent
employees must receive training within
60 calendar days after employment that
meets the definition of a securitysensitive employee. If an individual is
employed on an intermittent or nonpermanent basis, such as a contractor
hired to perform a security-sensitive
function for short durations, then the
training must take place before the
individual’s aggregated length of
employment by the owner/operator
equals 60 calendar days within a
consecutive twelve-month period.
Training is not required if an individual
28 These deadlines are set by secs. 1408(d)(3),
1517(d)(3), 1534(d)3 of the 9/11 Act, codified at 6
U.S.C. 1137, 1167, and 1184.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
is employed to perform a securitysensitive function one time for less than
60 days. Training is required if an
individual performs a security-sensitive
function for short but repeated
durations and the aggregated period of
time equals 60 days. TSA recognizes
that some owner/operators may choose
to train all regular contractors or other
individuals employed for short but
regular durations rather than having to
monitor aggregated days of employment.
In meeting the initial training
schedule, TSA expects that many
owner/operators will rely on the
provisions in § 1570.107, which provide
standards for accepting previous
training. TSA may allow ‘‘training
credit’’ to be given for employees who
received equivalent security training
within one year before the rule’s
effective date. This training credit may
include the following:
• Training on emergency
preparedness plans that railroads
connected with the operation of
passenger trains must implement to
address subjects such as
communication, employee training and
qualification, joint operations, tunnel
safety, liaison with emergency
responders, on-board emergency
equipment, and passenger safety
information.
• Training on policies that public
transportation agencies implement to
ensure safety promotion to support the
execution of the Public Transportation
Agency Safety Plan required under 49
CFR part 673 for all employees, agents,
and contractors of any State, local
government authority, or other operator
of a public transportation system that
receives Federal financial assistance
under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53.
• Training provided through funds
granted under the Transit Security Grant
Program or other grant programs.
The recordkeeping provisions,
discussed below, require an owner/
operator to provide current and former
employees with documentation upon
request of any training completed to
meet the requirements of this rule.
Options for compliance with this
requirement could include providing
employees with certificates to validate
completed training. Providing
employees with documentation of
training is particularly relevant for
operations such as those in the OTRB
industry, where employees (for
example, commercial drivers) may work
for multiple owner/operators. If an
owner/operator can validate an
employee has received the required
training within the specified timeframe,
the training does not need to be
repeated. Because of its obligation to
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
ensure all training requirements are met,
the current owner/operator is
responsible for ensuring that any
previous training courses satisfy the
rule’s requirements and documenting
that the training was received within the
required timeframe.
Finally, there may be situations where
‘‘dual-hatted’’ or other specific-function
employees are required to receive
security training from other sources as
part of their jobs, such as railroad police
officers employed by the owner/
operator. As indicated above, it is the
obligation of the owner/operator to
ensure and document the training,
including training received under these
circumstances.
2. Recurrent Training (§ 1570.111(b))
TSA believes regular recurrent
training is essential for transportation
employees to maintain a high level of
awareness and competency. To ensure
this need is met, this rule requires
owner/operators to provide the TSAapproved security training curriculum
to their security-sensitive employees at
least once every three years. This
frequency is consistent with the
requirements for security training
imposed by the Pipeline and Hazardous
Material Safety Administration
(PHMSA) for hazardous materials
employees under 49 CFR part 172.
In addition, consistent with 49 CFR
172.704, if the owner/operator modifies
a security program or security plan for
which training is required under this
rule, the owner/operator must ensure
that each security-sensitive employee
with position- or function-specific
responsibilities related to the revised
plan or program changes receives
training on the revisions within 90 days
of implementation of the revised plan or
program changes. This requirement
ensures employees responsible for
implementing the security program or
plan will be trained in a timely manner
concerning any changes or revisions to
the security plan or program as
necessary to reflect changes in security
affecting their specific operating
environment or the surface
transportation system.
3. Previous Training (§ 1570.107)
While there is no specific requirement
in the 9/11 Act for TSA to allow use of
existing training programs to satisfy the
security training regulatory
requirements, this rule provides an
opportunity for owner/operators to seek
recognition of previously provided
training. Under § 1570.107, an owner/
operator may rely on previous training
that occurred within the identified
periods for initial or recurrent training.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16465
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
In order to use previous training, the
owner/operator must validate that the
previous training satisfies the
requirements of this rule (for example,
reviewing records of training and
curriculum), is relevant to the
employee’s job function, and
appropriate for owner/operator’s
operations. As part of its inspection and
compliance authority, TSA may require
the owner/operator to provide the
documentation used to determine the
previous training met the requirements
of this rule.
K. Do employees have to pass a test?
((§§ 1580.113(b)(9), 1582.113(b)(9), and
1584.113(b)(9))
TSA is not requiring security training
programs to include employee testing,
with prescribed pass/fail rates. The
security training programs submitted to
TSA, however, must include how the
owner/operator will measure the
effectiveness of the training program.
TSA will afford flexibility to each
individual owner/operator to identify
measures for determining the
effectiveness of their security training
program using methods and criteria
appropriate for their operations. For
example, TSA expects that some owner/
operators will choose to administer a
written test or evaluation to gauge their
employees’ level of knowledge in order
to assess the overall effectiveness of
training, while others may rely upon
operational tests conducted by
supervisors to determine whether
employees are being trained effectively.
Some may use the results of drills and
exercises to measure effectiveness and
identify areas where modifications are
needed.
Similarly, TSA is not prescribing
conditions for a pass/fail policy that
may be associated with post-training
testing. While individual companies
may elect to enforce pass/fail criteria
with associated personnel actions, TSA
is neither requiring nor recommending
a specified maximum number of times
that an individual may take a test or
evaluation to demonstrate knowledge
and competency. As previously noted,
however, the methods submitted by an
owner/operator for determining training
efficacy may affect TSA’s approval of
any alternative measures for
compliance. In reviewing security
training programs, TSA’s focus is on
whether the program includes measures
for the effectiveness of the training
program, not an individual employee’s
performance.
III. Operational Requirements (Subpart
D)
TSA requires freight and passenger
railroad carriers, rail transit systems, rail
hazardous materials shippers, and
certain rail hazardous materials
receivers, to appoint ‘‘rail security
coordinators’’ 29 (RSCs) and report
significant security concerns to TSA.30
The RSCs are security liaisons to TSA,
providing a single point of contact for
receiving communications and inquiries
from TSA concerning threat information
or security procedures, and coordinating
responses with appropriate law
enforcement and emergency response
agencies. This information, reported to
TSA from the frontline of rail
operations, is consolidated and
analyzed by TSA to identify developing
threats and trend analysis.
TSA is expanding applicability of
these requirements to the owner/
operators subject to the security training
requirements. As a result, the scope of
the requirement applies to:
• All rail operations subject to the
security coordinator and reporting
requirements under previous 1580.101,
1580.105, 1580.201, and 1580.203 (now
located in sections 1570.201 and
1570.203);
• Any bus operations of a public
transportation owner/operator required
to provide security training under this
rule; and
• Any OTRB owner/operator required
to provide security training under this
rule.31
As proposed in the NPRM, the rule
text for applicability of the security
coordinator requirements erroneously
included all bus-only public
transportation systems, TSA intended,
however, to limit applicability to the
bus-only public transportation systems
within the scope of the security training
requirements, that is, the higher-risk
bus-only systems.32 To be consistent
with TSA’s intent as explained above
and in the preamble of the NPRM, TSA
is clarifying the requirement in the final
rule text.
Table 2 compares applicability scope
of the previous requirement with the
expanded applicability. The cost
estimate for this requirement in the
NPRM is consistent with TSA’s intent
and the corrected rule text.
TABLE 2—COMPARISON OF APPLICABILITY FOR SECURITY COORDINATOR AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Previous
§§ 1580.101/
103 and
1580.201/203
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Freight railroad carriers ...........................................................................................................................................
Rail hazardous materials shippers ..........................................................................................................................
Rail hazardous materials receivers in High Threat Urban Areas (HTUAs) ............................................................
Owner/operators of private rail cars* .......................................................................................................................
Railroads hosting freight or PTPR rail operations ...................................................................................................
29 These requirements were promulgated in 2008,
see supra n. 8, codified at 49 CFR 1580.101 and
1580.201 (before changes made by this rule).
30 See id. at 49 CFR 1580.105 and 1580.203
(before changes made by this rule).
31 As previously noted, TSA currently requires
security coordinators for rail operations, including
freight railroads, passenger railroads, and public
transportation rail operations. In addition to
mandating security coordinators for railroads, the 9/
11 Act also requires security coordinators for bus
operations. See 9/11 Act sec. 1531, codified at 6
U.S.C. 1181(e)(1)(A) (‘‘Identification of a security
coordinator having authority—(i) to implement
security actions under the plan; (ii) to coordinate
security improvements; (iii) to receive immediate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
communications from appropriate Federal officials
regarding over-the-road bus security’’). See 9/11 Act
sec. 1512, codified at 6 U.S.C. 1162(e)(1)(A). For a
similar provision applicable to railroads. Consistent
with this mandate, TSA is extending the
requirement to appoint a primary and at least one
alternate security coordinator for OTRB companies
and bus operations of PTPR owner/operators
identified as higher-risk through this rulemaking.
This will have a limited impact on the PTPR mode
as most public transportation bus agencies covered
by this rule are part of a larger system that is already
required to have a security coordinator under
current 49 CFR part 1580. See sec. III.D.4 of the
NPRM for more discussion regarding the security
coordinator and reporting requirements (81 FR at
91350 et seq.).
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
X
X
X
X
X
New
§§ 1570.201/
203
X
X
X
X
X
32 See 81 FR at 91350: ‘‘Because of the benefits
of [the security coordinator and reporting
requirements] to transportation security, TSA is
proposing to extend these requirements to the
modes of transportation covered by this proposed
rule that are not currently subject to the
requirements of 49 CFR part 1580. . . . TSA
proposes to extend the requirement to appoint a
primary and at least one alternate security
coordinator for OTRB companies and the bus
operations of PTPR owner/operators (with a limited
impact as most public transportation bus agencies
are part of a larger system that is required to have
a security coordinator under current 49 CFR part
1580).’’
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16466
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—COMPARISON OF APPLICABILITY FOR SECURITY COORDINATOR AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS—Continued
Previous
§§ 1580.101/
103 and
1580.201/203
PTPR operating rail transit systems on general railroad system, intercity passenger train service, and commuter train services ..............................................................................................................................................
PTPR operating rail transit systems not part of general railroad system ...............................................................
PTPR operating bus transit or commuter bus systems in designated areas .........................................................
Tourist, scenic, historic, and excursion rail owner/operators* .................................................................................
OTRB owner/operators providing fixed-route service in designated areas ............................................................
X
X
........................
X
........................
New
§§ 1570.201/
203
X
X
X
X
X
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
* Security Coordinator only required if notified by TSA in writing that a threat exists. Requirement to report significant security concerns always
applies.
A. Security Coordinator Requirements
(§ 1570.201)
Security coordinators are a vital part
of transportation security, providing
TSA and other government agencies
with an identified point of contact with
access to company leadership and
knowledge of the owner/operators’
operations, in the event it is necessary
to convey extremely time-sensitive
information about threats or security
procedures to an owner/operator,
particularly in situations requiring
frequent information updates. The
security coordinator and alternate
provide TSA with a contact in a
position to understand security
problems; immediately raise issues
with, or transmit information to,
corporate or system leadership; and
help recognize when emergency
response action is appropriate. The
individuals must be accessible to TSA
24 hours per day, 7 days per week.
The rule does not change the
expectation that the security coordinator
and alternate be appointed at the
headquarters level. Nor does the rule
require the security coordinator or
alternate to be a dedicated position who
has no other primary or additional
duties. As with the previous part 1580
requirements, TSA’s primary concern is
having a designated point of contact
available to TSA at all times.
The rule also requires the owner/
operator to submit contact information
for both the security coordinator and
alternate and to update this information
within 7 days if it changes. As
previously noted, this is not a new
requirement for owner/operators of
railroads, including the rail transit
operations of PTPR owner/operators. If
an owner/operator subject to this rule
has provided current information for
primary and alternate RSCs to TSA, it
will not have to take further action to
meet the requirement.33 TSA assumes
33 Any changes to the information must, as
previously required, be reported within seven
calendar days of the change taking effect.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
this is true for passenger rail carriers,
freight railroad carriers, and rail transit
systems operated by public
transportation agencies. Owner/
operators required to appoint security
coordinators for the first time under this
rule must provide this information to
TSA by July 29, 2020. TSA will also use
this contact for communications related
to requirements in this rule.
B. Requirement To Report Security
Concerns (§ 1570.203)
As with the security coordinator
requirement, TSA is moving and
consolidating the requirement to report
security concerns from part 1580 into
§ 1570.203 and extending it to higherrisk bus operations.34 The list of
reportable incidents can be found in
Appendix A to part 1570 and includes
not only a list of incidents, but
descriptions and examples to assist
regulated parties in making a
determination of whether an incident
must be reported based on its similarity
to one of the examples.
This list of reportable significant
security concerns is consistent with the
Nationwide Suspicious Activity
Reporting (SAR) Initiative (NSI). The
NSI is a partnership between Federal,
State, local, tribal, and territorial law
enforcement that ‘‘establishes a national
capacity for gathering, documenting,
processing, analyzing and sharing SAR
information . . . in a manner that
rigorously protects the privacy and civil
liberties of Americans.’’ 35 The NSI
defines ‘‘suspicious activity’’ as
‘‘observed behavior reasonably
indicative of pre-operational planning
associated with terrorism or other
criminal activity.’’ 36 The standardized
34 This extension is within TSA’s discretion to
require other actions or procedures determined to
be appropriate to address the security of public
transportation and OTRB operations. See 9/11 Act
sections. 1405(c)(2)(I) and 1531(e)(1)(H), as codified
at 6 U.S.C. 1134 and 1181, respectively.
35 See Nationwide SAR Initiative (NSI), ‘‘About
the NSI’’ (accessed Nov. 3, 2016), available at https://
nsi.ncirc.gov/about_nsi.aspx.
36 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
approach among law enforcement
officers and security officials with
surface transportation entities produces
more informative reports that can, more
effectively, focus investigative efforts
and intelligence analysis for potential
trends and indicators of terrorismrelated activity.
Finally, consistent with TSA’s
purpose in requiring submission of the
information, the rule requires
notification within 24-hours of the
initial discovery of the incident by the
owner/operator (see 49 CFR
1570.203(a)).37 This schedule will
enable TSA to obtain timely
information, without undermining the
ability of the owner/operator to
appropriately handle a situation. If there
is an immediate threat, owner/operators
and/or their employees should prioritize
notifying and working with first
responders. The notification to TSA
should occur after the immediate crisis
is addressed, but within a timeframe
that allows TSA to assess and share
timely information.
For purposes of this requirement, the
clock ‘‘starts running’’ when the owner/
operator becomes aware of the incident.
Awareness of the owner/operator
includes awareness of (or discovery by)
employees of the owner/operator.38 TSA
recognizes that local law enforcement
do not always immediately notify
owner/operators when there is a
security-related incident on the owner/
operator’s property or affecting their
operations.
C. Methods for Reporting Information
and Substance of Information Provided
(§ 1570.203 (a) and (c))
As previously noted, TSA has almost
a decade of experience with incidents
reported by railroads. Based on this
experience, TSA recognizes that its
ability to analyze the data and improve
37 This change to reporting is a modification from
the requirement as promulgated in the Rail Security
Rule, which required immediate reporting.
38 One of the required training elements includes
how to appropriately report security issues.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
the quality of information disseminated
back to its stakeholders is proportional
to the quality of information it receives.
Section 1570.203(b) is consistent with
the reporting requirements as
promulgated in 2008, which reflected
the need for detailed and verified
information from individual owner/
operators to enhance TSA’s ability to
provide timely and useful information
products to all of the relevant
stakeholders.
TSA is working on two initiatives that
should assist owner/operators with
reporting information. The first is to
pilot an electronic reporting option for
significant security concerns.39 If made
a permanent capability, TSA intends to
develop an online form that owner/
operators, or their designated
employees, may use to submit
information to TSA to meet the
requirements of this rule. If the pilot
succeeds, TSA may pursue a second
initiative to provide an electronic
reporting form on a secure website. TSA
will provide updates on development of
these capabilities to owner/operators
through the designated security
coordinators as well as appropriate
notices in the Federal Register. Pending
completion of these capabilities owner/
operators and their designated
employees are generally required to
meet the requirements of this section by
contacting the Transportation Security
Operations Center at 1–866–615–5150.
There is an exception for owner/
operators participating in the pilot to
report electronically.
IV. Security Program Procedures
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
A. Deadlines Related to Submission and
Approval of Security Training Program
Section 1570.109 identifies the
required deadlines for submitting
security training programs and the
process for TSA approval. In general,
not later than 90 days from the effective
date of this final rule, owner/operators
are required to submit programs to TSA
in a form and manner prescribed by
TSA. Owner/operators commencing
new businesses or operations triggering
applicability are required to submit
their security training programs to TSA
no less than 60 days before commencing
operations.
TSA will provide details for
submission of security programs
directly to security coordinators
identified under section 1570.201,
39 See OMB Control No. 1652–0051, 30-Day
Notice: Revision of Agency Information Collection
Activity Under OMB Review: Rail Transportation
Security, 83 FR 40542 (Aug. 15, 2018), and related
supporting statement available at https://
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRA
ViewDocument?ref_nbr=201809-1652-002.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
within 10 business days from the
effective date of this final rule.
Consistent with comments received on
the NPRM, this information will include
the designated email address and any
related information regarding
submission of Sensitive Security
Information (SSI).
As required by the 9/11 Act, TSA will
review the programs within 60 days of
receipt and either approve them or
specify changes that are needed for
approval.40 If TSA requires changes, the
owner/operator must submit a modified
training program that meets TSA’s
specifications within 30 days of
notification by TSA. TSA provides an
analysis of burden and estimated costs
associated with this information
collection in section VIII.A. of this
preamble and the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) 83–I Supporting
Statement for its information collection
request, which is available in the docket
for this rulemaking.
B. Amendments
Procedures related to revision and/or
amendment of security training
programs, as described in §§ 1570.113,
1570.115, and 1570.117, are necessary
as part of developing a regulatory
program and are consistent with the 9/
11 Act’s requirements for
implementation and submission of
programs. These procedures are also
consistent with TSA’s statutory
authority to allow exemptions from
regulatory requirements.41 The rule
provides for two types of amendments:
(1) Amendments initiated by owner/
operators and (2) amendments initiated
by TSA.
1. Amendments Initiated by Owner/
Operator (§ 1570.113)
Under section 1570.113, there are
three situations which require owner/
operators to submit a request to amend
their security training programs: (1)
Changes affecting ownership or control
of the operations; (2) changes to
conditions affecting security; and (3)
changes to content in the security
training program. Owner/operators must
seek an amendment if any of these
changes are expected to have a duration
of more than 60 days.
Amendments related to changes in
ownership/control are necessary for
TSA to maintain current information
about relevant contacts as well as for
purposes related to enforcement and
liability. Amendments related to the
40 See 9/11 Act secs. 1137(d)(2), 1167(d)(2), and
1184(d)(2), codified at 6 U.S.C. 1137, 1167, and
1184.
41 See 49 U.S.C. 114(q).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16467
second and third categories are
necessary to ensure the training
programs are providing relevant and
timely information to security-sensitive
employees.
This final rule revises the NPRM’s
proposed requirement for seeking an
amendment for any changes relating to
‘‘measures, training, or staffing
described in the security program.’’
Since publication of the NPRM, TSA
determined that the scope of this
requirement is too broad as it could
capture measures relevant to security in
general, such as theft. As proposed, the
requirement could impose an
unnecessary burden on owner/operators
and create conflict between the
programmatic requirements. For
example, the overly broad requirement
for amendments could result in the need
to revise a security training program to
address issues not related to reducing
the risk of terrorism-related incidents.
To narrow the scope of the
amendment requirement, the final rule
incorporates a specific list of the types
of changes to security that require an
amendment. For purposes of identifying
what types of changes should be
included in the list, TSA determined the
most appropriate source is the 9/11
Act’s requirements for TSA to issue a
vulnerability assessment and security
planning regulation for surface owner/
operators.42 The 9/11 Act’s provisions
are tailored to security issues related to
reducing the risk of terrorism-related
incidents.
If an owner/operator makes any
changes to the security measures
identified in § 1570.113, the owner/
operator must request an amendment to
modify the TSA-approved security
training program to align with these
changes. In general, the program must
be amended if there are changes to
procedures intended to prevent and
detect unauthorized access to restricted
areas; measures to be implemented in
response to periods of heightened
security risk; and changes to emergency
response plans.
The security program requirements
established by this rulemaking will also
be applicable to a future rulemaking to
address the 9/11 Act’s requirements for
42 As previously discussed, the 9/11 Act includes
a mandate for TSA to issue regulations requiring
vulnerability assessments and security plans in
addition to the requirements for security training.
See 9/11 Act sections 1405, 1612, and 1531,
codified at 6 U.S.C. 1134, 1162, and 1181,
respectively. The security planning requirements
include a detailed list of security measures that
must be incorporated into an owner/operator’s
TSA-approved security plan. TSA intends to
address the vulnerability assessment and security
training requirements through a separate
rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
16468
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
vulnerability assessments and security
planning. As a result, incorporating the
9/11 Act’s list of security measures to be
incorporated in security planning as the
basis for determining when an
amendment is necessary to a security
training program establishes a
framework that can be consistently
applied in the future as the scope of
requirements for higher-risk owner/
operators of surface transportation
systems is expanded.43
Finally, owner/operators must request
an amendment if their security training
program is modified, including
modifications related to addressing the
effectiveness of the program or
development of recurrent training
materials that differ from the initial
training. This provision is intended to
ensure an owner/operator is
appropriately addressing the results of
its TSA-approved method for
determining effectiveness of security
training.44 It is TSA’s intent that this
specificity will reduce the burden for
owner/operators by providing clarity on
the types of changes that may trigger the
need for an amendment. If there are any
changes in these areas, it is reasonable
to expect that some aspects of the
security training program must be
revised.
In addition to the preceding issues
that require owner/operators to request
an amendment, the same procedures
can be used when the owner/operator
seeks to amend its program to address
other operation issues. For example, an
owner/operator may choose to seek an
amendment to modify the required
training schedule. The same procedural
requirements for seeking an amendment
apply.
TSA may approve an amendment if it
is in the interest of public and
transportation security and meets the
required security standards. As part of
its standard practice for security
program administration, TSA works
with owner/operators on amendment
requests to develop options acceptable
to both TSA and the requesting owner/
operator. TSA may ask for additional
information from the owner/operator or
require more time in order to makes its
determination.
If TSA is unable to come to agreement
with the owner/operator on the content
or scope of the amendment, TSA may
deny the amendment request. The
denial will include a statement of why
the request is denied. The owner/
operator can petition for reconsideration
under section 1570.119.
43 See
discussion supra in n. 42
requirements in subpart B to parts 1580,
1582, and 1584.
44 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
While the rule only requires
amendments if the change is to be
permanent (defined as 60 or more
calendar days), TSA recognizes that
there are times when a change of short
duration could have a significant impact
on training. For example, if a city is
hosting a National Special Security
Event (NSSE), the public transportation
system serving that city may implement
additional security measures. It is likely
that additional training will be
necessary to raise appropriate awareness
of these additional measures. The rule
does not require the owner/operator to
request an amendment to provide this
additional training.
TSA is also modifying the schedule
for submitting an amendment from the
requirement as proposed in the NPRM.
Under the NPRM, an amendment had to
be submitted no later than 45 days
before the change takes effect. This
schedule does not work with the
provision that allows changes to
security measures to be in effect for 60
days before they are considered
permanent, and only permanent
changes require notification and
amendment. To address this
inconsistency, TSA is requiring
amendments to be submitted within 65
days of the change. As the owner/
operator controls changes to the security
measures identified in the rule and
whether these changes will be
permanent, it is presumed the owner/
operator will have sufficient advance
notice that an amendment is needed and
can prepare and submit the request
within this timeframe. This specificity
is added to provide clarity for
compliance.
2. Amendments Initiated by TSA
(§ 1570.115)
TSA may require amendments in the
interest of the public and transportation
security. As indicated in § 1570.115,
TSA may require owner/operators to
revise their training based on emerging
threats or methods for addressing
emerging threats. This is consistent with
TSA’s authorities under 49 U.S.C. 114
and the 9/11 Act, which specifically
provide that TSA must update the
requirements, as appropriate, ‘‘to reflect
new or changing security threats.’’ 45 For
example, the curriculum requirements
identified in the 9/11 Act do not address
training to respond to active shooter
incidents. Following several active
shooter incidents, including one that
45 See 9/11 Act at 1408(d)(4), 1517(d)(4), and
1534(d)(4), codified at 6 U.S.C. 1137, 1167, and
1184, respectively. This provision also requires
owner/operators change their programs to address
TSA’s requires updates and retrain employees as
necessary, within a reasonable time.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
resulted in the death of a Transportation
Security Officer in Los Angeles,
Congress prioritized the need for this
type of training.46 TSA could also
require an amendment to provide
additional training to address risks like
the NSSE discussed above, in section C.
As with other requirements imposed by
TSA, the owner/operator may request a
petition for reconsideration of TSArequired amendments.
C. Alternative Measures (§ 1570.117)
Section 1570.117 includes the
procedures for requesting a waiver,
procedures for requesting the use of
alternative measures, and identification
of the types of information TSA will
need in order to make a decision to
grant such requests. TSA may grant
such a request under the authority 49
U.S.C. 114(q), based on a determination
that the alternative measure or
exemption is in the public interest. In
general, TSA will consider factors such
as risk associated with the type of
operation, current threat information,
and any other factors relevant to
potential risk to the public and
transportation security if the request is
granted.
These procedures can be used by an
owner/operator to request alternative
measures to satisfy all of some or all of
the requirements of subchapter D. For
example, the owner/operator could
request to extend the time period for
submitting its training program or for
training all of its security-sensitive
employees. An owner/operator could
also request a waiver from some or all
of the regulatory requirements. For
example, a freight railroad may meet the
criteria for applicability, but the
operations that trigger applicability may
be a de minimis part of its overall
business operations. In such a situation,
the owner/operator might consider
requesting either a complete waiver or
an alternative that limits the
requirements to a more discrete part of
its business.
D. Petitions for Reconsideration
(§ 1570.119)
Section 1570.119 describes the review
and petition process for TSA’s
reconsideration when it denies a request
for amendment, waiver, or alternative
measures, as well as a TSA requirement
46 Section 7 of the Gerardo Hernandez Airport
Security Act of 2015 (Pub. L. 114–50), which
directed TSA, in consultation with the Department
of Transportation and other relevant agencies, to
conduct outreach to all passenger transportation
agencies and providers of high-risk facilities to
verify such agencies and providers have in place
plans to respond to active shooters, acts of
terrorism, or other security-related incidents that
target passengers.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
to modify or amend a program. If an
owner/operator seeks to challenge the
decision, the owner/operator is required
to submit a written petition for
reconsideration within the time frame
identified in the applicable section. The
petition must include a statement, with
supporting documentation, explaining
why the owner/operator believes the
reason for the denial or for the
amendment, as applicable, is incorrect.
If the owner/operator requested the
amendment, the results of the
reconsideration could be confirmation
of TSA’s previous denial or approval of
the proposed amendment. If the issue
involves a TSA-required amendment,
the results of the reconsideration could
be withdrawal, affirmation, or
modification of the amendment. A
disposition pursuant to 49 CFR
1570.119 occurs when the
Administrator or designee has disposed
of the petition by affirming, modifying,
or rescinding the previous decision.
Such disposition constitutes a final
agency action for purposes of review
under 49 U.S.C. 46110.
E. Recordkeeping Requirements
(§ 1570.121)
The final rule requires owner/
operators to create and maintain lists of
their security-sensitive employees and
specify when these employees received
the required training. Training records
must include each trained employee’s
name, job title or function, date of
hiring, and date and course information
on the most recent security training that
each employee received. Records for
individual employees must reflect the
training courses completed and date of
completion. Records of an employee’s
initial and recurrent training must be
maintained by owner/operators for no
less than five years from the date of the
training and available at the location(s)
specified in the security training
program approved by TSA.
The final rule provides flexibility to
owner/operators to decide whether to
maintain the records in electronic
format provided that (1) any electronic
records system used is designed to
prevent tampering, loss of data, or
corruption of records, and (2) paper
copies of records, and any amendments
to these records, must be made available
to TSA upon request for inspection or
copying. Whether the records are kept
in electronic or other form, the
employee must be provided with proof
of training upon request, at any time
during the three-year recordkeeping
period, without regard to the requestor’s
current status as an employee of that
entity. As discussed above in II.J. (Initial
Training), owner/operators may meet
the proof-of-training requirement by
providing a certificate, letter, or other
similar documentation to the employee
16469
upon completion of training. In order
for TSA to allow any owner/operator to
rely upon previous security training to
satisfy the requirements of this rule, it
is critical that employees be able to
validate whether they received previous
training.
TSA assumes training records are
unlikely to include SSI, but nonetheless
provides a reminder in this provision
that any SSI maintained as a result of
these recordkeeping requirements must
be maintained consistent with the
requirements in 49 CFR part 1520. For
example, an owner/operator may decide
to keep a copy of the content of the
training program with the employee
files (which is not required by the rule).
If the curriculum contains SSI
information, any file it is in must be
stored as required by the SSI
regulations. Owner/operators needing
additional information about
appropriately maintaining SSI may
contact TSA for assistance and/or find
information on TSA’s website.47
F. Summary of Deadlines
The following table summarizes the
deadlines for the preceding
programmatic requirements. The
information is provided for operations
that exist on the effective date of this
rule and those that may commence or
trigger applicability based on future
modifications.
TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF DEADLINES FOR COMPLIANCE
Dates
Requirement
Existing operations
Effective date of rule ............................
Deadline for notifying TSA of applicability determination (1570.105).
New or modified operations
June 22, 2020.
July 22, 2020 .................
Deadline for providing security coordi- July 29, 2020 .................
nator information to TSA (1570.201).
Deadline for submission of security 90 calendar days from
training program to TSA for apeffective date.
proval (1570.109(b)).
TSA approval or notification of re- 60 calendar days from
quired modification (1570.109(c)).
receipt of security
training program.
Initial training of security-sensitive em- 1 year from TSA apployees (1570.111(a)).
proval of security
training program.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Recurrent training of security-sensitive
employees (1570.111(b)).
Within three-years of the
date of initial training
and every three-years
thereafter.
New employees (hired after TSA approves the security program)
90 calendar days before commencing new or modified operations.
7 calendar days after commencement of operations.
90 calendar days after commencing
new or modified operations.
60 calendar days from receipt of security training program.
1 year from TSA approval of security
training program.
60 calendar days after employee first
performs a security-sensitive job
function (60th day, aggregated
over 12-month period, if intermittent employee).
Within 90 days of changes to security program or security plan affecting employees’ security-related responsibilities.
47 See https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/sensitivesecurity-information.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16470
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
V. Miscellaneous Changes
This final rule includes the following
changes to other provisions in TSA’s
regulations as necessary to implement
these requirements.
A. Amendments to Part 1500
Consistent with the rule’s
organization, TSA includes definitions
for terms relevant to several subchapters
of TSA regulations, beyond the
requirements of subchapter D, in part
1500. Terms only relevant to the
provisions in subchapter D are
incorporated in § 1570.3. Terms
uniquely relevant to each mode or the
other requirements in subchapter D are
incorporated into the relevant parts.
As noted in the NPRM, TSA is
meeting a 9/11 mandate to define,
through notice and comment
rulemaking, the term ‘‘security-sensitive
material.’’ To meet the requirement,
TSA is incorporating by reference the
definition of hazardous materials for
which a security program is required
under 49 CFR 172.800(b), promulgated
by PHMSA through notice and comment
rulemaking and in consultation with
TSA.48 There are no current TSAprogrammatic requirements linked to
this definition. A full discussion of
amendments to the terms in part 1500
is provided in the NPRM.49
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
B. Amendments to Part 1503
TSA is making minor amendments to
part 1503 (Investigative and
Enforcement Procedures), as necessary,
to conform these regulations to changes
made by this final rule. In § 1503.101(b),
the scope of statutory provisions is
amended to add authorities from the 9/
11 Act that are administered by the TSA
Administrator. These are conforming
amendments with no cost impact.
C. Amendments to Part 1520
TSA is also finalizing proposed
modifications to part 1520 (Protection of
Sensitive Security Information). As
discussed in the NPRM, these changes
are necessary to conform the SSI
provisions to include the transportation
security-related requirements in this
rule.50 The amendments are limited to:
(1) Eliminating unnecessary terms from
part 1520 that are added to part 1500
and (2) replacing the limiting term ‘‘rail
transportation security requirement’’
with ‘‘surface transportation security
requirement.’’ In some places, such as
the definition of ‘‘vulnerability
assessment’’ in § 1520.3, TSA is
48 See
49 See
81 FR at 91344.
section III.A. of the NPRM. 81 FR at 91342
et seq.
50 See id. at 91343–91345.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
streamlining a lengthy description of
types of transportation to simply state
‘‘aviation, maritime, or surface
transportation.’’
The impact of these revisions should
also be minimal. Under § 1520.7(j), any
person who has access to SSI is required
to protect it according to the
requirements of the regulation. Most of
the population affected by this rule has
previously received SSI information
from TSA, as well as training on the
proper handling of SSI, and have
procedures in place to ensure the
requirements of the regulation are met.51
D. Amendments to Part 1570
Because of the significant
restructuring of part 1570, as discussed
above, the rule text includes the entire
part. In addition, TSA is adding a
provision related to security
responsibilities and relocating to this
part the provisions related to
compliance, inspection, and
enforcement (previously in part 1580).
1. Security Responsibilities for
Employees and Other Persons (§ 1570.7)
Under § 1570.7, the obligation for
compliance is not limited to owner/
operators specifically referenced under
applicability provisions. Rather, any
person may be held to have violated
these rules, including contractors who
provide service to owner/operators and
the employees of such contractors. This
provision in subchapter D ensures a
uniform application of TSA’s
enforcement policy across all modes of
transportation, consistent with TSA’s
authority under 49 U.S.C. 114(f).52 In
addition to violations for failure to
comply with requirements, TSA can
also pursue enforcement actions for
interfering with compliance or hiding
evidence of non-compliance.
Contractors are also subject to
inspection for compliance with this rule
and enforcement actions, as discussed
below.
2. Compliance, Inspection, and
Enforcement (§ 1570.9)
TSA is mandated to: (1) Enforce its
regulations and requirements; (2)
oversee the implementation and ensure
the adequacy of security measures; and
(3) inspect, maintain, and test security
facilities, equipment, and systems for all
modes of transportation.53 This mandate
applies even in the absence of
51 See https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/sensitivesecurity-information.
52 See 49 U.S.C. 114(f)(7) and (11). A similar
provision applicable to aviation employees and
other related persons is in 49 CFR 1540.105(a)(1)
and (b).
53 See 49 U.S.C. 114(f).
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
rulemaking, but TSA has chosen to
include a restatement of its authority in
its rules. The statute specifically
requires TSA to—
• Assess threats to transportation;
• Enforce security-related regulations
and requirements;
• Inspect, maintain, and test security
of facilities, equipment, and systems;
• Ensure the adequacy of security
measures for the transportation of cargo;
• Oversee the implementation, and
ensure the adequacy, of security
measures at airports and other
transportation facilities;
• Require background checks for
airport security screening personnel,
individuals with access to secure areas
of airports, and other transportation
security personnel; and
• Carry out such other duties, and
exercise such other powers, relating to
transportation security as the
Administrator considers appropriate, to
the extent authorized by law.
While current part 1570 includes a
provision stating TSA’s compliance,
inspection, and enforcement authority,
it is not provide the same detail found
in other regulatory provisions.54
Therefore, TSA is transferring the text of
current § 1580.5 to subpart A as
§ 1570.9, with minor modifications to
reflect the addition of certain bus
operations that have previously been
unregulated by TSA.55
3. ‘‘Covered Person’’ (§ 1570.305)
This final rule includes a technical
correction to § 1570.305 (currently
§ 1570.13) of subchapter D as part of this
rulemaking. This provision prohibits
public transportation agencies and rail
carriers from knowingly
misrepresenting Federal guidance or
regulations related to security
background checks for certain
individuals.56 The definitions in the
section currently include the term
‘‘covered individual,’’ which may result
in confusion as to whether the term has
the same meaning as ‘‘covered person’’
in TSA’s programs to address access to
SSI.57 To eliminate any potential for
confusion, this rule amends § 1570.305
54 Compare current § 1570.11 with current
§ 1580.5. The provision in part 1580 is also
consistent with 49 CFR 1542.5, 1544.3. 1546.3,
1548.3, and 1549.3.
55 A more detailed discussion of current § 1580.5,
still relevant to the section, can be found in the
preamble for current part 1580. See 71 FR 76852
(Dec. 21, 2006) and the Rail Security Rule, see
supra n. 8. (Final Rule).
56 This final rule moves this section from
§ 1570.13 of subchapter D to section § 1570.305.
The requirement was added to address another 9/
11 Act requirement. See 73 FR 44665 (July 31, 2008)
for more information on the rulemaking that added
this provision.
57 See 49 CFR 1520.7.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
to delete the definition and consistently
use the term ‘‘employee’’ (as defined by
this rulemaking in § 1570.3) rather than
‘‘covered individual.’’ This change is for
clarification purposes only and has no
substantive impact.
16471
VI. Summary of Changes
The following table summarizes
changes between the NPRM and final
rule.
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF CHANGES BETWEEN NPRM AND FINAL RULE
Section No.
Section title
Change from NPRM
1570.111(b) .................
Implementation schedules (recurrent security training).
1570.113 ......................
Amendments requested by owner/
operator.
1570.201 ......................
Security coordinator ...
In response to comments, TSA is modifying
the recurrent security training schedule to a
three-year cycle rather than annual.
Changes to security programs and plans
may require training certain employees
within 90 days of the changes.
NPRM proposed requiring owner/operators to
request an amendment to their security
training programs when there are changes
to (a) ownership or control of operations
and/or (b) measures, training, or staffing
described in the security program. The final
rule includes a specific list of the types of
changes that would trigger the need to update the security training program. The
NPRM also proposed to require an amendment to be filed within 45 days before the
amendment takes effect. The final rule requires an amendment to be requested no
later than 65 days after the change to the
security program/measures/plans takes effect.
NPRM proposed requiring all public transportation agencies to have a security coordinator. Final rule limits the scope of the requirement to rail operations of public transportation agencies and the bus-only operations of those determined by TSA to be
higher-risk.
1570.203 ......................
Reporting significant
security concerns.
NPRM proposed requiring all public transportation agencies to report security issues.
Final rule limits the scope of the requirement to rail operations of public transportation agencies and the bus-only operations of those determined by TSA to be
higher-risk.
1570.305 ......................
False statements regarding security
background checks
by public transportation agency or railroad carrier.
TSA is making a technical correction to this
provision by replacing the term ‘‘covered
individual,’’ with the term ‘‘employee,’’
which is defined by this rulemaking in
§ 1570.3.
VII. Response to Comments on NPRM
Following TSA’s publication of the
NRPM on December 16, 2016, industry
associations, unions, and private
citizens were among those who
submitted comments in docket TSA
2015–0001. TSA’s responses are
organized by topic.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
A. General Comments
1. Need for Rule
Comments endorsing the rulemaking
and recommending an expanded scope:
A number of submissions included a
statement of general support for TSA to
issue this rulemaking. Commenters also
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
endorsed the rule, noting that proper
training could prevent harm to both
employees and passengers. A few
commenters suggested expanding the
scope of the rulemaking to include
additional training for surface workers,
such as self-defense training, or to
provide training to all American citizens
to identify terrorist threats. One
commenter supported a ‘‘community of
the whole’’ approach, reflecting the
collaborative and cooperative
partnership between TSA and industry
to detect and deter individuals seeking
to commit acts of terrorism.
TSA response: This rulemaking is
intended to solidify a baseline of
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Implication
Cost Savings.
TSA recognizes that some owner/operators
may have security programs that address
issues not related to transportation security, such as theft or vandalism. TSA is narrowing the scope of the requirement to reduce the burden. The final rule identifies
the types of issues that would require
amendment. The list of issues used by
TSA is consistent with the requirements for
security plans in sections 1405, 1512, and
1531 of the 9/11 Act. Modifying the deadline for requesting an amendment is intended to provide clarity for compliance
and be more appropriate for the types of
amendment-requests TSA expects to receive.
The scope of this requirement in the NPRM
was broader than TSA intended as the result a drafting error. TSA intended the security coordinator requirement to apply to
all of the rail operations and shippers/receivers covered by the Rail Security Rule,
plus bus operations required to provide security training under this rule.
The scope of this requirement in the NPRM
was broader than TSA intended as the result of a drafting error. TSA intended the
reporting requirement to apply to all of the
rail operations and shippers/receivers covered by the Rail Security Rule, plus bus
operations that are required to provide security training under this rule.
This technical revision eliminates potential
confusion in the terminology.
security training. Promulgation of this
rule does not signal a change in TSA’s
commitment to maximize enhancements
to surface transportation security
through voluntary cooperation and
collaboration. Consistent with this
commitment, TSA does not believe it is
necessary to expand the scope of
applicability or requirements, but
encourages owner/operators to provide
additional security training as they
consider appropriate to address
potential vulnerabilities or threats
within their unique operational
environments. As noted in the NPRM,
TSA encourages owner/operators
covered by this rule to determine
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16472
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
whether there are employees not
covered by the scope of the securitysensitive definition who could provide
benefits to security if trained.
Regarding the recommended
expansion of the rule to cover broader
populations, including the general
public, DHS has numerous programs
and initiatives to provide and encourage
awareness of terrorist threats and
appropriate responses. These initiatives
include ‘‘hometown security’’ and the
‘‘See Something, Say Something’’
campaign. More information on these
initiatives and training available to
support them can be found on the DHS
website.58 TSA also encourages owners/
operators not within the scope of the
rule’s applicability to voluntarily
provide security training to their
employees, using the curriculum
requirements in this rule to guide
development of voluntary security
training programs. As noted in section
II.A., TSA also intends to provide
resources developed to support this rule
to other owner/operators, as
appropriate.
Comments opposing rulemaking:
Other commenters opposed the
rulemaking, primarily because they
believe certain modes already conduct
training, and asserted these efforts make
the rulemaking unnecessary. Three
commenters expressed concern the rule
overlaps with existing State and Federal
training requirements, including the
FRA’s 2014 final rule, which established
minimum training standards for all
safety-related railroad employees.59 One
commenter suggested States may have
different requirements, which should be
considered in this rulemaking. Several
commenters advocated for the rule to be
voluntary, and noted voluntary training
has so far produced exceptional results.
TSA response: As previously
discussed, TSA has a statutory mandate
to publish a final rule requiring security
training for frontline employees of
public transportation agencies,
railroads, and OTRB owner/operators.60
The statutory mandate includes specific
requirements for the content of the
required security training. In addition,
TSA determined it is necessary to
require security training for employees
of higher-risk surface transportation
operations and appropriate to use its
58 See www.dhs.gov/hometown-security and
www.dhs.gov/see-something-say-something.
59 See 79 FR 66460 (Nov. 7, 2014), codified at 49
CFR part 243.
60 See discussion in section I.A. of this rule. See
also 81 FR 91341 (discussion of statutory
authorities and requirements for this rulemaking).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
general authority under ATSA to issue
a rule including these requirements.61
The terrorism-related threat to surface
transportation modes has not subsided
and Congress has not retreated from its
commitment to the need for this rule.
Since enactment of the 9/11 Act,
Members of Congress and the DHS
Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
have expressed continued interest in the
publication of this rule.
This rulemaking is intended to
solidify the baseline for security training
of surface employees. TSA recognizes
the substantial efforts of our
stakeholders to enhance their security
posture since 9/11 and seeks to
recognize and build upon these efforts.
As noted in the NPRM, owner/operators
subject to requirements to provide
similar training may request to use this
training to satisfy requirements in this
rule. For example, TSA is aware that
many public transportation agencies
and railroads currently provide security
training to comply with State or Federal
training requirements. (TSA is not
aware of any overlapping requirements
for OTRB owner/operators.) If an owner/
operator intends to use previous
training or existing training programs in
order to satisfy some or all of the
requirements of this rule, the program
submitted to TSA for approval must
identify how the other training satisfies
TSA’s requirements. This will likely
necessitate submitting the curriculum or
lesson plan for that program and
training records, as well as information
on the employees who have completed
the training and the date of the most
recent training.
Regarding voluntary training, TSA
acknowledges many owner/operators of
higher-risk surface transportation
operations have voluntarily
implemented security training programs
addressing some of the requirements in
this rule. As noted in the Preliminary
Regulatory Impact Analysis and Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (NPRM
RIA), however, the private market may
not provide adequate incentives for
owner/operators to make an optimal
investment in the full range of measures
to reduce the probability of a successful
terrorist attack based on the economics
of externalities. Mandating security
training for higher-risk operations will
solidify the current baseline of security
training established through voluntary
measures.62
61 See 81 FR 91339–91341 (discussion of purpose
and authorities).
62 See NPRM RIA at 116–117 (available in the
docket to this rulemaking at www.regulations.gov).
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2. Cost of Rule
Comments: Some commenters
expressed concern that the cost of the
rulemaking is too high, and that the rule
is too costly for industry to implement.
Commenters also asserted the estimate
of OTRB owner/operators is too low,
and questioned whether TSA’s costestimate analysis considers the
Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA).63 One commenter generally
suggested that the expense of providing
security awareness training to surface
transportation personnel may not be
justified by the potential benefits.
Another commenter, a mass transit
agency in a large metropolitan area,
estimated the cost of the rule to be
higher than the estimate TSA provided
in the NPRM RIA.
TSA response: A full discussion of the
cost-benefit analysis is included in the
Final Regulatory Impact Analysis and
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (Final
RIA) 64 and summarized in section
VIII.B.1. While training and the other
requirements of this final rule are not
absolute deterrents for a terrorist intent
on carrying out attacks on surface
modes of transportation, TSA expects
the probability of success for such
attacks to decrease when the
requirements of this rule are fully
implemented.
Regarding the commenters concerns
that TSA’s estimate of OTRB owner/
operators within the scope of
applicability is too low, TSA
acknowledges the inherent uncertainty
in this estimate due to the fluid and
opaque nature of the industry. As
described in the Final RIA, ‘‘many
[OTRB] owner/operators that operate
charter and/or tour services also provide
scheduled or fixed-route services,
sometimes on an ad hoc basis, making
it difficult for any one source to keep
track of those that may provide
scheduled service as part of their nonprimary operation.’’ 65 In response to the
issue of disparate data, TSA consulted
multiple sources and databases to build
its estimate.’ The commenter who stated
the OTRB estimate was too low did not
provide any reason to support the claim
that TSA underestimated the number of
affected owner/operators or any source/
63 Public Law 104–4, 109 Stat. 48 (Mar. 22, 1995),
codified at 2 U.S.C. 1501–1538.
64 The Final RIA is available in the docket for this
rulemaking at www.regulations.gov.
65 Id. at 40. Note: Under the requirements of this
rule, any owner/operators conducting ad hoc or
sub-contracted service for a regulated person must
comply with the requirements of the rule as an
authorized representative. Similarly, an owner/
operator not subject to the requirements of the rule
may trigger applicability if they contract for ad hoc
or subcontracted service through an area that
triggers applicability.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
data to back up the assertion. As
mentioned in the NPRM RIA, TSA
sought public contribution to refine its
estimate, but neither the commenter nor
anyone else provided any data or new
information on which to build a
different estimate.
Title II of UMRA, establishes
requirements for Federal Agencies to
assess the effects of their regulatory
actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector.66
Agencies must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million
or more in any one year.67 TSA’s
analysis for both the NPRM RIA and
Final RIA determined this rule does not
contain a Federal mandate that may
result in expenditures of $100 million or
more either for State, local, and tribal
governments in the aggregate, or for the
private sector in any one year.
The commenter who stated security
awareness training may not be justified
by the potential benefits did not provide
data to support this assertion. Based
upon the data available to TSA, as
shown in the Final RIA, TSA disagrees
with the commenter. In both the NPRM
and Final RIA, TSA includes a chapter,
titled ‘‘Benefits of Employee Security
Training,’’ which identifies the security
risks to surface transportation and
explained how providing employees
with the knowledge to prepare, observe,
assess, and respond to a terrorist related
threat or incident reduces the
vulnerability to a terrorist attack. In
addition, TSA conducted a break even
analysis that compared the cost of the
surface training program to the direct
economic losses that would be averted
by avoiding certain terrorist attack
scenarios. Given the relative small costs
of implementing training compared to
the catastrophic costs of a successful
terrorist attack, this analysis found that
the rule would only have to deter, at
minimum, one attack every 40 years for
the benefits to equal costs for freight
rail, a number that increases to one
attack every 166 years for OTRBs.68 The
monetized benefits of preventing an
attack would likely be greater were TSA
66 See
supra n. 63.
at sec. 202, codified at 2 U.S.C. 1532. The
$100 million in 1995 dollars is adjusted for
inflation to 2017 dollars using the GDP implicit
price deflator for the U.S. economy. Bureau of
Economic Analysis, National Data, Table 1.1.4.
Price Indexes for Gross Domestic Product, Line 1
Gross domestic product. Available at: https://
apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=19&step=
2#reqid=19&step=2&isuri=1&1921=survey.
68 See Final RIA at Section 4.3.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
67 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
to conduct a break even analysis that
accounts for the difficult-to-estimate
macroeconomic and other indirect
impacts (avoided indirect costs) that
may be even more significant than the
direct impacts of the attack. Avoided
consequences, such as the value of a
reduction in fear felt by the public at
large, are not included in the analysis
because they are difficult to measure
and quantify. Given these results and
the demonstrated effectiveness of
employee training—including security
awareness in mitigating terrorist
attacks 69—TSA believes the benefits of
the rule justify its costs. Finally, as
previously discussed, TSA is under a
statutory mandate to publish a final rule
requiring security training for frontline
employees of public transportation
agencies, railroads, and OTRB owner/
operators.
One commenter, from a large
metropolitan area public transportation
system, provided information to support
statements that the costs of
implementing the rule would be higher
than TSA estimated in the NPRM RIA
for that commenter. TSA believes there
are a number of issues with the
commenter’s estimate that result in an
overestimation of the rule’s burden. The
commenter assumed the duration of
training to be three hours when TSA
estimates that training for securitysensitive employees of a PTPR owner/
operator will likely average 1 hour and
20 minutes in order to address all of the
required elements in this rule.70 The
commenter appears to base their three
hour estimate on an assumption that a
classroom setting and development of
original course material is necessary. As
further discussed below in section
VII.D., TSA is not requiring instructor or
classroom training and will further
mitigate costs by providing a video, free
of charge, to regulated owner/operators
for compliance with the parts of the
rule. TSA intends for this material to
cover three of the four PTPR training
elements in the rule and take less than
one hour.
Finally, the commenter comes from
one of the largest metropolitan areas in
the United States with one of highest
costs of living. This leads TSA to
believe that the estimate provided by
the commenter is likely higher than the
national average of transit agencies. TSA
used national wage data for transit
69 See id. at Section 4.1 (full summary of the
threat to surface transportation and an example of
security training effectiveness).
70 See Final RIA at Section 2.4 for an explanation
and rationale to why TSA estimates 1 and 20
minutes needed to train mass transit agencies’
security-sensitive employees on the training
components of the final rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16473
agencies from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics to estimate cost of the rule to
PTPR owner/operators. TSA believes
this is a reasonable rate to calculate
incurred costs to regulated PTPR owner/
operators because it encompasses the
entire transit industry (which are
typically found in cities around the
country). Based on this analysis, TSA
believes its cost-assessment for the final
rule is representative of the incremental
burden PTPR owner/operators will
incur from implementing the regulatory
requirements at a national level.
However, TSA does acknowledge that
differences in the cost of labor among
the various cities may contribute to
certain transit agencies having higher or
lower costs than the national average.
3. Stakeholder Consultation
Comments: Several commenters
suggested TSA consult with labor
unions in drafting the rulemaking, as
required by the 9/11 Act, and also reach
out to international security experts.
TSA response: The 9/11 Act directed
TSA to consult with major stakeholders
during the development of the NPRM,
including labor organizations. As noted
and summarized in the NPRM, TSA
conducted numerous meetings and
conference calls with all necessary
parties, including relevant labor
organizations.71 In addition to inviting
participation of labor union
representatives in many of the modespecific meetings, TSA also met directly
with labor unions as part of its
stakeholder consultation process,
including the Transportation Trades
Department of the American Federation
of Labor and Congress of Industrial
Organizations, the International
Brotherhood of Teamsters, the
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers,
and the Amalgamated Transit Union.72
International outreach is also a key
component of TSA’s transportation
security mission. TSA surface
representatives partner with the
international community through a
number of forums, such as INTERPOL,
European Network of Railway Police
Forces (RAILPOL), and the United
Nations led International Working
Group Land Transport Security
(IWGLTS). These meetings include a
regular exchange of lessons learned in
addressing emerging threats within the
surface transportation environment.
4. Terms
Comments on definition of
‘‘transportation security-sensitive
materials (TSSM)’’: Several commenters
71 See
72 See
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
81 FR 91336 at 91368–91370.
id. at 91370.
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
16474
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
asked for clarification regarding how the
TSSM definition applies to motor
coaches, and suggested industry aid
TSA in determining what should qualify
as TSSM. One commenter asked TSA to
provide handling and storage
information regarding TSSM specific to
the motor coach industry.
TSA response: As noted in the NPRM,
TSA is satisfying a 9/11 Act requirement
to define TSSM 73 by incorporating by
reference the hazardous materials
identified in 49 CFR 172.800(b). There
are no specific requirements in the rule
related to the definition. To the extent
there are requirements associated with
the materials identified in 49 CFR
172.800(b), persons should consult 49
CFR part 172, the hazardous materials
rules promulgated by PHMSA. The
PHMSA rules include security
requirements related to these specific
materials. The PHMSA requirements
were promulgated through notice and
comment rulemaking, including
participation by relevant stakeholders in
developing the list of materials.
Comments on definition of ‘‘host
railroad’’: One commenter asserted the
definition of ‘‘host railroad’’ is
confusing. Additionally, the commenter
noted TSA’s expectations of the
railroads responsible for ensuring
training of employees in ‘‘host’’
situations are unclear, as railroads
currently train employees under
existing training programs.
TSA response: As noted in the
NPRM,74 TSA is defining ‘‘host
railroad’’ consistent with the definition
well-established by use for the rail
industry under rules of the FRA.75
Under this rule, both the host and
tenant railroads are required to have a
training program that appropriately
addresses the ramifications of the
hosting relationship. For example, the
host railroad’s training program will
need to address the operational
considerations of the hosting
relationship, such as training
dispatchers on their role and
responsibilities in halting the tenant
railroad’s operations over a segment of
track where there is a potential threat
(such as a suspected IED or tampering
with infrastructure). Similarly, a tenant
railroad subject to the security training
requirements of 49 CFR part 1582
(PTPR), will need to address the
operational considerations of the
hosting relationship, such as instructing
its train and engine employees on the
proper communication procedures to
73 Id.
at 91344.
at Table 3, Explanation of Proposed Terms
and Definitions.
75 See 49 CFR 236.1003.
74 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
follow when a potential threat is
identified. Under either example, the
host and tenant railroad owner/
operators will only be responsible for
training their own employees.
When inspecting for compliance by
regulated parties participating in a
contractual relationship, TSA will
consider the freight railroad carrier (the
private company) to be an authorized
representative of the PTPR owner/
operator (the owner/operator of the
passenger train service). TSA will hold
the PTPR owner/operator primarily
responsible for compliance and for
ensuring that all security-sensitive
employees receive the required training,
whether they are employed directly by
the PTPR owner/operator or contractor.
The PTPR owner/operator must train
the freight railroad carrier’s employees
performing security-sensitive functions
related to the passenger train service.76
B. Investigative and Enforcement
Procedures
Comments on penalties and violations
under 49 CFR part 1503: Several
commenters requested clarification
regarding the exact penalties for noncompliance, and others asked TSA to
explain the basis of violations.
TSA response: The 9/11 Act included
authority for TSA to assess civil
penalties for violations of title 49 of the
U.S. Code, including surface
transportation requirements.77 TSA
posts, and regularly updates, its
sanction policies on its website.78
Between this rule’s date of publication
and effective date, TSA will update this
policy to address violations of this rule.
Comments on compliance, inspection,
and enforcement under 49 CFR 1570.9:
Several commenters expressed concern
regarding how TSA will enforce the
rule. One commenter suggested TSA
and relevant DOT components should
develop a cooperative enforcement
program allowing DOT personnel to
enforce TSA’s security training
requirements as they conduct their
safety inspections. Several commenters
suggested TSA coordinate with the
owner/operator before an inspection,
and one suggested that TSA provide an
audit checklist before arriving on the
owner/operator’s property. Another
commenter asked TSA inspectors to
undergo safety training before visiting
the property. Finally, one commenter
76 See supra, section II.A.4 for more discussion on
the distinction between hosting and contractual
relationships and the ramifications for
responsibility of providing security training.
77 See sec. 1302(a) of the 9/11 Act. TSA is issuing
this rule under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 114.
78 See https://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/
enforcement_sanction_guidance_policy.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
suggested TSA consider an audit
program for contractors, rather than
making the owner/operator responsible
for ensuring contractor receives training
or otherwise comply with the rule’s
requirements.
TSA response: As explained in the
NPRM, TSA is mandated to: (1) Enforce
its rules and requirements; (2) oversee
the implementation and ensure the
adequacy of security measures; and; (3)
inspect, maintain, and test security
facilities, equipment, and systems for all
modes of transportation.79 TSA’s
authority over transportation security is
comprehensive and supported with
specific powers related to the
development and enforcement of
security-related regulations and other
requirements. Within this broad
authority, the agency may assess a
security risk for any mode of
transportation and develop security
measures for dealing with this risk.80 If
TSA identifies noncompliance with its
requirements, TSA may hold the owner/
operators responsible for the violation
and subject to enforcement action,
which may result in civil monetary
penalties.81
Pursuant to its statutory authority and
responsibilities, TSA is the sole Federal
agency with authority to enforce its
regulations. DOT’s components do not
have authority to enforce TSA’s rules
and TSA cannot enforce theirs. DHS and
DOT, however, do consult and
coordinate with each other on securityrelated issues pursuant to various
memoranda of understanding (MOU).
To mitigate concerns about duplication
of efforts by inspectors, DHS has entered
into an MOU with DOT with separate
annexes between TSA and the modal
components of DOT. These annexes
address coordination on regulatory
matters.
When appropriate, TSA will
coordinate with an owner/operator on
inspections. Notice gives the parties to
be inspected the opportunity to gather
evidence of compliance and to arrange
to have the appropriate personnel
available to assist TSA. Some
inspections, however, can only be
effective if TSA’s presence is
unannounced. TSA must have the
flexibility to respond to information,
operations, and specific circumstances
whenever they exist or develop.
Security concerns are different at
different times of the day and on
different days of the week. Terrorists
may seek to take advantage of
vulnerabilities whenever they occur.
79 See
81 FR 91341, citing 49 U.S.C. 114.
U.S.C. 114(f) and (l).
81 49 U.S.C. 114(f) and (v).
80 49
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
TSA has the authority to assess the
security of transportation entities during
all times of the day or night and under
all operational situations (including
nights, weekends, and holidays). The
nature of any given TSA inspection will
depend on the specific circumstances
surrounding a particular owner/operator
at a given point in time and will be
considered in conjunction with
available threat information.
An audit checklist is unnecessary for
this program. Under the rule, owner/
operators are required to submit a
security training program to TSA for
approval. As the regulated owner/
operators are the original drafters of the
security training program approved by
TSA, they should not need a checklist
from TSA to inform them of the
program’s content and requirements.
The use of TSA-provided training
material does not eliminate the owner/
operator’s ownership of the program
and knowledge of the program’s
contents. The security training program
developed and submitted by the owner/
operator to TSA for approval is likely to
include additional information provided
or developed by the owner/operator to
meet all of the curriculum requirements.
Regarding having TSA inspectors
undergo safety training prior to visiting
a property, TSA’s inspectors are
properly trained regarding how to safely
inspect an owner/operator’s property
and the importance of complying with
official safety-related requirements
while on the owner/operator’s property.
For example, TSA puts its inspectors
through a rigorous training program,
incorporating classroom and field
training, so inspectors are
knowledgeable on all aspects related to
this regulatory program as well as on
safety issues. TSA recognizes the
importance of this training to ensure
inspectors avoid danger to themselves,
to workers on the inspected property, to
travelers, and to the inspected property.
Finally, concerning the suggestion
that TSA consider an audit program for
contractors, in lieu of making the
owner/operator responsible for ensuring
contractor receives training, TSA
applies two important regulatory
policies related to responsibilities of
contractors. First, contractors
performing measures required under
TSA’s rules are ‘‘authorized
representatives’’ of the regulated
party.82 As part of its general
enforcement policy, TSA consistently
holds regulated parties responsible for
82 See the rule’s definition of ‘‘authorized
representative’’ in 49 CFR 1500.3.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
the actions of their authorized
representatives.
Second, authorized representatives
and other contractors (and their
employees) are also responsible for
complying with TSA’s regulatory
requirements. Under section 1570.7 of
this rule, any person may be subject to
enforcement action for violations of the
rule, including contractors who provide
service to owner/operators and the
employees of such contractors. As a
result, TSA could pursue an
enforcement action against the regulated
party, the regulated party and the
contractor as an authorized
representative, or against the contractor.
C. Part 1570—General Rules
1. Terms Used in This Subchapter
(§ 1570.3)
Comments on definition of ‘‘securitysensitive employees’’: In addition to
comments of general support for the
definition of security-sensitive
employee, TSA received a few questions
about the term. One commenter sought
more information on what defines an
employee in a security-sensitive
position, specifically asking whether the
definition includes a cyber-expert or a
frontline engineer staffing a commuter
train. Another commenter suggested
replacing the term with ‘‘Frontline
Employees’’ for consistency with the 9/
11 Act, finding the term ‘‘securitysensitive’’ to be confusing and therefore
subject to misinterpretation. Further,
this commenter found no risk-based
justification for establishing a
classification of employees to determine
who should receive security training.
TSA response: As discussed in the
NPRM, the definition of ‘‘securitysensitive employees’’ includes
employees who perform functions with
a direct nexus to, or impact on,
transportation security based on their
job functions.83 Engineers are
specifically covered within the job
functions identified for 49 CFR parts
1580 (freight railroads) and 1582 (public
transportation and passenger railroads).
A cyber-expert may be considered a
security-sensitive employee based upon
specific job functions, such as functions
involving control or movement of trains,
or because of other cyber-security
responsibilities related to the owner/
operators security measures in its
security plan to protect the integrity of
its information systems.
TSA chose the term ‘‘securitysensitive’’ for this rule to mirror the
term ‘‘safety-sensitive’’ used in rules
promulgated by DOT. There is no
83 81
PO 00000
FR 91333 et seq.
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16475
statutory requirement for TSA to
specifically use the term ‘‘frontline
employee,’’ as long as the scope of the
rule includes the employees identified
in relevant portions of the 9/11 Act,
which it does.
Finally, as discussed in the NPRM,84
TSA applied a risk-based approach to
all requirements in this rule, including
the definition of security-sensitive
employee. The NPRM explained TSA
began with an analysis of the employees
listed in the 9/11 Act’s definitions of
‘‘frontline employees’’ who must receive
training 85 and then considered whether
other employees may also be in a
position to spot suspicious activity
because of where they work, their
interaction with the public, or their
access to information. TSA also
considered who needs to know how to
report or respond to these potential
threats. This additional group of
employees includes managers,
supervisors, or others who perform the
function or who so directly supervise
the performance of a function that their
nexus to the job function is equivalent
to the employee.
2. Recognition of Prior or Established
Security Measures or Programs
(§ 1570.7)
Comments related to use of existing
training: Several commenters suggested
that TSA should allow use of previous
training or programs to satisfy the rule’s
requirements. The range of these
existing programs include training
provided under TSA’s First ObserverTM
program and existing railroad security
training, which commenters assert
meets the intent of the 9/11 Act.
Commenters noted that both freight and
passenger railroads currently maintain
effective security training programs.
Comments on how to use these
existing programs varied, including
allowing owner/operators to amend
their existing programs to make them
comply with the rule’s requirements;
letting currently trained employees be
‘‘grandfathered’’ in as long as their
training meets the rule’s requirements;
and a request that TSA determine these
existing training programs meet the 9/11
Act’s requirements without imposing
additional regulatory requirements.
Finally, a commenter expressed
concern that owner/operators will be
allowed to fulfill the training
requirements in a variety of ways,
creating unique programs for each
system. The commenter noted the
84 See
id. at 61353–61355.
id. at Table 6, Comparison of security
training NPRM proposed categories for ‘‘securitysensitive employees’’ to 9/11 Act definitions of
‘‘frontline employees’’ who must be trained.
85 See
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16476
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
training requirements may become
overly burdensome for employees and
employers if an employee must be retrained every time he or she leaves one
transportation operation and joins
another.
TSA response: Consistent with
requirements of the 9/11 Act, the rule
specifically provides for recognition of
previous training in § 1570.107.86 Under
this section, owner/operators can use
previously provided training meeting or
exceeding the requirements of the rule
to the extent they can provide
documentation of the training and
validation this training satisfies the
requirements applicable to that
employee. The rule also provides
owner/operators with the flexibility to
use other training programs addressing
some or all of the same topics to satisfy
the regulatory requirements in
§§ 1580.113(c), 1582.113(c), and
1584.113(c).87
TSA recognizes that many of the
owner/operators to be regulated by this
rule have taken voluntary actions to
raise their security baseline. TSA
applauds these efforts, but also notes
that they do not negate the benefits of
this rulemaking. The purpose of this
rule is to solidify the baseline for those
that have already implemented security
training programs, and to raise those
who have not to a consistent standard
across higher-risk operations. To the
extent owner/operators established
security training programs consistent
with the 9/11 Act as a voluntary
initiative or implemented use of TSA’s
First ObserverTM program,88 and
continue to provide regular training to
their employees, these efforts should
significantly mitigate any costs for
compliance with the rule.
Finally, the provision on use of
previous training, in § 1570.107, also
addresses concerns about unique
training programs and the impact on
employees who change jobs. If the
owner/operator can validate the content
and timing of the previous training, the
rule allows this training to be credited
towards satisfying the regulatory
requirements. At most, the new
employer may need to supplement
portions of previous training to address
unique aspects of its own TSA-approved
86 See id. at 91347 for the discussion on this topic
in the NPRM.
87 See id. at 91361–91362.
88 The First ObserverTM program, previously
known as Operation Secure Transport, has been in
use for highway motor carriers (OTRB owner/
operators) and covers the Observe, Assess, and
Respond security training components required by
this rulemaking. TSA credits those OTRB owner/
operators who have used the First ObserverTM
program in its RIA (full description in Section 1.5
of the Final RIA).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
security training program. This allows
the owner/operator to ensure all of the
security-sensitive employees receive
training specific to their operations in
order to best mitigate security risks.
3. Submission and Approval
(§ 1570.109)
Comments on frequency of submitting
security training programs to TSA: Two
commenters suggested companies
should be permitted to submit training
plans and curriculum only once to TSA,
which TSA would store and review on
a yearly basis and make recommended
changes based on the current threat.
TSA response: The rule does not
impose a specific schedule for owner/
operators to submit updates to their
security programs, such as an annual
update. It does, however, require owner/
operators to request to amend their
programs if necessary to reflect changes
in ownership or permanent changes in
operations affecting the security training
program or curriculum.89 For example,
a program may need to be updated if the
owner/operator replaces equipment
resulting in instructions conflicting with
the current security training curriculum,
or expands operations into a new
commodity with different risks, changes
personnel structures affecting reporting,
or begins operations in a new
geographical area. In addition, the final
rule narrows the scope of amendments
required for changes to security
measures or plans. Recognizing an
owner/operator’s security program may
include issues not specifically relevant
to the scope of transportation security
this rule is intended to address, the final
rule includes a list of the specific type
of measures and program changes
triggering the requirement to request an
amendment. TSA may also require
owner/operators to amend their plans in
the interest of the public and
transportation security.90
Comments on methods for submitting
security programs to TSA: A number of
commenters supported submitting
training programs to TSA via electronic
means, such as in email on a secured
password protected platform. One
commenter also expressed support for
the proposed initial security program
submission and approval process, as
well as the amendment approval
process.
Two commenters, however, raised
concerns with this process, claiming it
is too rigid and cumbersome to be
effective. Commenters noted railroad
89 See § 1570.113 and discussion in section
IV.B.1.
90 See § 1570.115 and discussion in section
IV.B.2.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
training programs are robust and
adaptable, evolving to address threats
and security concerns. To continue to be
effective, the commenters advocated
that they be allowed to update their
programs as needed without TSA
approval. They also noted the FRA
already oversees railroad security
training programs, and TSA inspectors
can review the same materials. They
noted that given their current process,
the NPRM lacked adequate justification
for the imposition of a prescriptive
process for submission, review, and
approval of training programs already in
effect.
TSA response: In response to
concerns regarding form of submission,
TSA intends to allow for electronic
submission of required documentation,
consistent with SSI requirements.
Relating to the need for updating
programs, the final rule requires owner/
operators to adapt their training
materials to address specific threats in
the various modes as they emerge. TSA
approval is not required for an update
unless the changes stay in effect for
more than 60 days. For example, an
owner/operator may provide additional
training to address risks associated with
a city hosting a national special security
event. If the changes are to stay in effect
for more than 60 days, the owner/
operator must formally request approval
to amend their security program. As the
required content for the required
security training is general operation
security, TSA does not anticipate the
TSA-approved security training needing
to change significantly in response to a
specific threat.
As to the concern about duplication of
effort, TSA may accept all or portions of
an owner/operator’s existing security
training. Under § 1570.107, an owner/
operator may rely on previous training
provided within the stipulated periods
for initial or recurrent training, as
validated by TSA (based on information
submitted by the owner/operator). In
addition, the rule provides for owner/
operators to rely on training conducted
pursuant to other requirements to satisfy
the rule’s security training
requirements.91 In fact, the rule
specifically references training required
by FRA.92 In reviewing material
prepared for other requirements, TSA
will determine whether the material
adequately addresses security training
from TSA’s perspective and reduces the
risk of a terrorist-related attack on the
transportation. As previously noted,
TSA mitigates concerns about
91 See §§ 1580.113(c), 1582.113(c), and
1584.113(c).
92 See §§ 1580.113(c) and 1582.113(c).
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
duplication of inspections, through the
annexes to the DHS/DOT MOU. These
annexes address distinctions between
TSA’s focus on security and DOT’s
focus on safety, as well as coordination
on regulatory matters between TSA and
the relevant modal components of DOT.
Finally, regarding the prescriptive
process requirements, TSA reviewed all
requirements in this rule to identify any
options to reduce the burden without
undermining the rule’s effectiveness or
conflicting with requirements in the 9/
11 Act. The 9/11 Act specifically
requires submission of the training
programs to DHS for approval and
regular updates.93 TSA believes the
submission and approval requirements
in § 1570.109 are consistent with this
statutory requirement, provide clear
instruction on how this requirement is
to be met, and ensure consistent
application of the rule’s requirements.
4. Implementation Schedule
(§ 1570.111)
Comments on initial security training:
Several commenters advocated for the
proposed accumulated grace periods,
ranging from 90 to 180 days, to allow
recently hired employees to work before
they complete the training
requirements. One commenter suggested
abandoning the accumulated days
concept and replacing it with a
requirement for all employees to receive
security training no later than 90 days
after beginning employment. One
commenter suggested a method for
calculating date: A day should be based
on full-time employment, with each 8hour period worked counting as one
day. Regarding contractors, the same
commenter suggested the training
responsibility should rest with the
contracted company.
Comments also addressed how to
regulate temporary and/or part-time
employees. One commenter suggested
all drivers, whether employees or
contractors, should be trained. Another
commenter explained ‘‘pooling
agreements,’’ which allow or require
employees from other companies to
operate their equipment, and noted
these arrangements should be covered
in the final rule.
TSA response: While TSA appreciates
concerns regarding the implementation
schedule for initial training, the 60-day
requirement is set by the statute. As
noted in the NPRM, the 9/11 Act
requires initial training within the first
60-days of employment for new
employees or for those transitioning to
a covered job function (as identified in
93 9/11 Act sections 1408(d), 1517(d), and
1534(d).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
Appendix B to parts 1580 (freight rail),
1582 (PTPR), and 1584 (OTRB).94 TSA
is not adopting the suggestion of a day
equaling an aggregated 8-hour period.
TSA’s intent with this rule is to ensure
employee’s that are regularly positioned
to identify and respond to security
threats are prepared to do so. TSA does
not believe that this priority is served by
hourly calculations to determine what
constitutes a day.
As to contractors, TSA consistently
applies a policy requiring regulated
parties to accept responsibility for their
contractors, including employees
operating under pooling agreements.
Any person working for an owner/
operators within the scope of
applicability, performing a securitysensitive position—without regard to
primary employer or full/part-time
status—must be trained. In other words,
a pooling agreement does not mitigate
the need for security training. The
impact of this policy is more fully
discussed under comments related to 49
CFR part 1503.
Finally, TSA is not changing the
aggregated employment requirement in
§ 1570.111(4) nor the requirement for
employees (whether intermittent or
contract) to be trained no later than the
60th day of aggregated employment
performing a security-sensitive function.
This requirement ensures these
employees are trained after they are in
a position with a particular owner/
operator long enough to gain awareness
of the operations necessary to determine
when there is an anomaly that could
constitute a threat.
In response to the comment about all
drivers (presumably of OTRBs) being
required to receive training, TSA is
limiting it to individuals with a
commercial driver’s license to focus on
those with a nexus to security, in other
words, those likely to operate a bus to,
through, or from a high-risk location,
rather than employees moving a bus
across a yard. While TSA is not
currently requiring all drivers to receive
the security training, this does not
prevent owner/operators from
voluntarily providing the security
training required for security-sensitive
employees to a broader population of
employees.
In addition, TSA is developing
training materials that can be
consistently used across a particular
mode. Use of this material, coupled
with the ability to use previous training,
will minimize the burden of ensuring
employees in pooling agreements
received adequate training. Owner/
operators can rely on the TSA-provided
94 See
PO 00000
81 FR 91347.
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16477
material to address most of the
requirements and limit their operationspecific training to procedures unique to
their operation, such as points of
contact to report security concerns and
emergencies.
Comments on recurrent security
training: TSA received a variety of
comments on recurrent training. Some
commenters generally supported annual
recurrent training. Other commenters
stated they should have flexibility to
self-determine the training schedule for
their employees, as opposed to an
adhering to a ‘‘one size fits all’’
approach. Some commenters expressed
concern with the time frame due to cost
constraints and the practicality of
training employees while
simultaneously maintaining service.
These commenters suggested longer
time periods between training, such as
two or three years. One commenter
highlighted the safety requirements in
FRA’s rules, which require training
every three years.
TSA response: TSA considered
options for recurrent training both
before proposing the requirement in the
NPRM and in consideration of
comments submitted on the NPRM. TSA
continues to believe in the importance
of recurrent training to meet the purpose
of the rule, but is adjusting the
frequency of training in consideration of
the comments. The final rule requires
recurrent training once every three
years. If, however, the owner/operator
modifies its security program or plan
and those changes affect the
responsibilities of specific securitysensitive employees, based on their
position or function in relation to
security program or plan requirements,
the affected employees must receive
recurrent training to address the
changes within 90 days of
implementation of the revisions. This
change is consistent with the
requirements for hazardous materials
employees under 49 CFR 172.704.95 The
recurrent training requirements are
discussed in more detail in section II.J.2.
5. Recordkeeping and Availability
(§ 1570.121)
Comments: Two commenters said the
proposed 5-year record-keeping
requirement would be excessive in
duration, costly and burdensome in
administration, and unjustified by any
risk-based factors. As an alternative,
they suggested owner/operators should
only be required to retain training from
95 In addition, TSA notes that it may order
modifications to a security program or plan, or
order additional training, as necessary. See, e.g., 49
U.S.C. 114(l).
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16478
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
the past three years (assuming TSA
adopts a 3-year training requirement).
TSA response: Within the context of
an annual recurrent training
requirement, TSA considered modifying
the record retention period based on the
comments as three years would provide
adequate records of previous training.
The change, however, to recurrent
training on a three-year cycle
necessitates maintaining the 5-year
retention schedule in order to ensure
that the owner/operator can provide
adequate representation of previous
training consistent with recurrent
training requirements as well as any
training based on modification to the
owner/operator’s security program or
plan.
6. Security Coordinator (§ 1570.201)
Comments on security coordinator
availability: Two commenters suggested
changes to the security coordinator
requirements specifically for railroad
companies. First, they suggested TSA
only require affected railroads to
maintain a 24/7 communications
capability to ensure TSA can reach the
rail security coordinators and
designated representatives for the stated
purpose of receiving intelligence
information and coordinating on
security practices and procedures.
Second, there was one objection to the
proposed requirement for freight
railroad operators to name rail security
coordinators (RSC) ‘‘accessible to TSA
on a 24-hour a day, 7-day a week basis.’’
The commenter suggests modifying this
proposal to require the railroad to
‘‘maintain a 24/7 communications
capability to ensure TSA can reach the
RSCs and designated representatives for
the stated purpose of receiving
intelligence information and
coordinating on security practices and
procedures.’’
TSA response: First, TSA is
reorganizing the location of the RSC
requirements promulgated in 2008,
moving the requirements from 49 CFR
part 1580 to part 1570 (§§ 1570.201 and
1570.203) and expanding applicability
of the existing RSC requirement to
include bus operations of public
transportation systems and OTRB
owner/operators within the scope of the
rule’s applicability. TSA neither
proposed nor is adopting any
modifications to the RSC requirements
as they apply to railroads and the
requirement regarding 24/7 accessibility
of security coordinators.
It is critical for security coordinators
to be ‘‘accessible to TSA on a [24/7]
basis’’ rather than accepting ‘‘a 24/7
communications capability [that] can
reach the RSCs.’’ Although most
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
communication between TSA and
security coordinators may be routine,
these individuals are intended to serve
key roles in times of heightened and
specific security threat and incident.
During such periods, immediate
communication with the security
coordinators may be required to prevent
or mitigate loss of life or severe harm to
transportation security. TSA believes
the requirement for security
coordinators to be accessible to TSA on
a 24-hour a day, 7-day a week basis is
amply justified by commonly accepted
principles of emergency and security
management. If TSA needs to convey
extremely time-sensitive security
information to a regulated party,
particularly in situations requiring
frequent information updates, the
information exchange benefits if there is
continuity in participants. The security
coordinator must be in a position to
understand security problems, raise
issues with corporate leadership, and
recognize when emergency response
action is appropriate. If the contact
changes every time TSA makes a call,
the loss of continuity will undermine
the effectiveness of the communication.
Comments on citizenship requirement
for security coordinators: Two
commenters stated disclosing
citizenship status is unnecessary and
should not be required. One of the two
commenters suggests TSA should
recognize Canadian government security
clearances in lieu of requiring RSC to be
citizens of the United States.
TSA response: The rule does not
require a rail security coordinator to be
a citizen of the United States. It does
however, require each owner/operator
to report the citizen status of
individuals it intends to put forward as
its RSC under § 1570.201(d). This
requirement is necessary to meet the 9/
11 Act requirement that security
coordinators be U.S. citizens unless
TSA determines it is appropriate to
waive the requirement ‘‘based on a
background check of the individual and
a review of the consolidated terrorist
watchlist.’’ 96 By providing this
information up front, TSA can initiate
any additional actions necessary to
comply with this requirement.
7. Reporting Significant Security
Concerns (§ 1570.203)
Comments on mandatory reporting
requirement, scope of reporting, and
form of reporting: Several commenters
opposed a mandatory reporting
requirement. A few argued the
requirements would open up their
companies and employees to liability
96 See
PO 00000
9/11 Act sections 1512(e)(2) and 1531(e)(2).
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
should an incident occur and an earlier
warning action was not observed.
Several other commenters specifically
opposed the 24-hour proposed time
limit, stating it was too short, and some
transit agencies may not know what the
threat is in that amount of time.
Commenters also suggested TSA
authorize electronic reporting of
significant security concerns to meet the
reporting requirements in § 1580.203.
These commenters noted the rail
industry has developed an electronic
reporting capability and demonstrated
its effectiveness in three industry-wide
exercises.
Finally, a few commenters asked for
additional clarity regarding what
‘‘significant security concern’’ entails,
and one asked for a list of examples.
One commenter specifically suggested
TSA harmonize its definition of
‘‘security threat’’ with the FRA’s
requirement in 49 CFR part 239. Several
commenters suggested streamlining the
requirements.
TSA response: As with the security
coordinator requirement, TSA is
reorganizing the location of the
reporting significant security concerns
requirements promulgated in 2008
(which were at 49 CFR part 1580),
placing the requirement in part 1570 to
expand its applicability to OTRBs and
bus operations of public transportation
system companies within the scope of
the rule’s applicability. As proposed in
the NPRM, TSA is making three primary
changes to the current requirement
through this final rule. These changes
affect all owner/operators required to
report, but results in a reduced burden
for rail operators previously required to
report. First, the rule modifies the
current requirement to report
immediately, to allow up to 24 hours to
report significant security concerns.
TSA is providing a period of up to 24
hours to report the information for two
reasons: (1) If there is an emergency, the
immediate priority is to notify and work
with first responders, not call TS, and
(2) TSA is aware the quality of
information provided is improved when
owner/operators have an opportunity to
review the information and ensure it
constitutes a valid significant security
concern consistent with the description
of activities in Appendix A to part 1570
before it is reported. TSA believes 24
hours is an adequate period for this
process to work effectively. If more time
is granted, the information may be too
stale to be of benefit to TSA or its other
stakeholders.
Second, TSA is modifying the existing
requirement to allow for electronic
reporting. The current rule requires
reporting to be made by telephone. With
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
1. Security Training Program General
Requirements (§§ 1580.113, 1582.113,
and 1584.113)
Comment on content creation: TSA
received several comments regarding
responsibility for creating training
content. TSA also received questions
concerning who will conduct training
and the training format, including
recommendations for TSA to consider
video training, in-classroom, and/or
field training. Another commenter
suggested putting a one-hour cap on
course length. One commenter
suggested an outside entity, not TSA,
should provide oversight for compliance
with the training. Several commenters
also suggested TSA should require
transit systems, rail carriers and OTRB
operators to seek the input of employees
and union representatives as they draft
their training plans, which would
ensure the plans consider individual
circumstances and are effective in
promoting transportation security.
TSA response: Rather than putting
limits on curriculum development, the
rule requires owner/operators to submit
their security training programs to TSA
for review and approval. While the
burden is on owner/operators to
develop and provide the training, the
rule neither prescribes how the content
is to be created nor dictates how it is to
be provided. The flexible requirement is
an intentional effort to address the
varied operational issues for owner/
operators required to provide training.
For example, larger owner/operators
may determine it is more cost-effective
to incorporate the training required by
this rule into existing training provided
in a classroom. For smaller operators,
web-based training may be easier.
To address this variety, the rule
requires owner/operators to develop and
implement a security training program
meeting the requirements of the relevant
subparts and ensures the standards are
met by requiring the program to be
submitted to TSA for review and
approval of the curriculum (including
lesson plans, objectives, and modes of
delivery) and method for measuring
effectiveness.98 TSA is unwilling to put
a cap on the requirement. Based on the
security awareness training TSA
requires for its own employees as well
as its work and discussions with experts
on content development, TSA assumes
adequately addressing all of the
required elements will take
approximately one hour.
TSA is committed to providing
maximum flexibility within the
constraints of the 9/11 Act’s
requirements and needs of regulatory
compliance. To support compliance,
TSA intends to provide complimentary
training material satisfying many of the
rule’s requirements. If owner/operators
choose not to use this material, they will
need to develop a full curriculum to be
approved by TSA. If they do use it, they
may still need to submit additional
material for any portion of the required
training (based on their unique
operations) not covered by the TSA
materials. As a result, the rule provides
a process balancing flexibility (for
owner/operators to develop a program
specific to their operational
environment) and TSA’s need to ensure
training programs meet the rule’s
purpose.
TSA does not agree with suggestions
for third-parties (not TSA) to oversee the
curriculum development and training.
In light of the flexibility given for
curriculum development, TSA must
ensure the minimum requirements of
the rule are met in order to satisfy both
the mandate of the 9/11 Act and TSA’s
intent for this rule to provide a
consistent baseline of security training
across higher-risk operations. TSA’s
subject matter experts for the modes of
operation covered by this rule will lead
this review and approval process.
TSA agrees the materials should be
relevant to the operational environment
and the employees who work within
that environment. Like other aspects of
curriculum development, the rule gives
owner/operators the flexibility
necessary to meet this objective without
imposing a prescriptive requirement.
Similarly, the rule does not prohibit
owner/operators from consulting with
relevant parties or developing programs
appropriate for their operational
environment.
Comment on size of train crew: One
commenter noted that a two-person
minimum crew in train cabs is vital to
defending national security. Their
concerns reflected current operational
requirements, such as monitoring of
computer screens rather than
monitoring conditions outside of the
train (such as the track).
TSA response: The purpose of this
regulation is to ensure employees
performing security-sensitive functions
receive adequate training. Staffing
requirements for train operation are
beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
Comments on effectiveness of security
training: The rule requires owner/
operators to include in their security
training programs a method for
evaluating the effectiveness of the
program.99 A few commenters suggested
ways to ensure the training is effective
and applicable to real-world situations.
Suggestions included having businesses
put up a poster as a general reminder of
the material covered in the class,
creating incentives (monetary or timeoff awards) to completing training, and
ensuring class is engaging and not only
a lecture in a classroom. Another
suggestion was to integrate randomized
written tests or drills of the covered
material, of which successful
completion could warrant an award.
Comments included suggestions for
training to be conducted in a classroom,
citing two benefits of classroom
training: (1) Allows employees to ask
questions and learn from questions and
discussions and (2) allows instructors to
work with employees through a variety
of scenarios, which would include
teaching how to look out for and spot
various security threat and explain the
various roles each employee serves in
responding to these threats. One
commenter asked whether the training
could be incorporated into ‘‘Entry Level
Driver’’-training, and also suggested an
online ‘‘train the trainer’’ course.
Commenters were divided on the
question of whether the training’s
effectiveness should be documented
through testing. Several commenters
stated that classroom testing should be
augmented by field testing. Others
suggested no testing should be required.
Several commenters suggested that TSA
incorporate efficacy standards or
incentives for public transportation
agency employees. As an alternative, a
number of commenters opposed any
kind of proficiency testing on the
training course material.
97 See Appendix A to part 1570. See also 81 FR
91351–91353.
98 See §§ 1580.113(b)(6), 1582.113(b)(6), and
1584.113(b)(6).
99 See §§ 1580.113(b)(9), 1582.113(b)(9), and
1584.113(b)(9). See also discussion at II.K.
this final rule, TSA is expanding the
requirement to allow for other methods
prescribed by TSA. TSA will
communicate these methods directly to
security coordinators to avoid a
situation where a phone number or
email address may become outdated
based on changes or requirements
beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
Third, as noted in the NPRM and
discussed in section III.C, TSA is
including in the final rule a table that
identifies categories of incidents and
provides detailed descriptions.97 These
incidents are modified from the
requirements promulgated in 2008 to
align with other standards, including
those mentioned by commenters, and
recommendations from the Government
Accountability Officer (GAO).
D. Subpart B—Security Programs
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
16479
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16480
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
TSA response: TSA is requiring the
owner/operator to describe the method
to be used for measuring effectiveness of
security training and will conduct
inspections to ensure the approved
method is being used, as part of
implementing the TSA-approved
security training program. While TSA
appreciates the information provided by
commenters for measuring the
effectiveness of training, TSA has
decided not to dictate which method
must be used. As part of its commitment
to recognizing the many unique
operational environments for owner/
operators subject to this regulation, as
well as the commitment to balance
maximum flexibility with effective
security, TSA is not requiring a specific
method for measuring effectiveness.100
TSA recognizes that pre- and posttesting in a classroom setting is an
efficient way to determine the
effectiveness of training. TSA also
acknowledges, however, that, other
methods of documenting the
effectiveness of training exist, which
may be preferable for some employees
and/or circumstances. Therefore, TSA is
not specifying a particular type of
testing or other method for determining
effectiveness, but will use the owner/
operator’s TSA-approved standard for
measuring effectiveness when
inspecting an owner/operator’s training
documentation to verify that each
employee who must be trained has
received the required training and that
the owner/operator has determined that
the training is effective.
2. Security Training and Knowledge for
Security-Sensitive Employees
(§§ 1580.115, 1582.115, and 1584.115)
Comments on security training
knowledge requirements: TSA received
varied comments on the required
security training curriculum content
requirements. The comments ranged
from asserting that the scope of the
training content is overly broad to
proposing additional training
requirements to be added to the rule.
One commenter, concerned that the
scope is too broad, suggested training
beyond awareness observation and
reporting may be excessive and
counterproductive to the safety and
convenience of passengers. The
commenter recommended that security
training requirements not exceed the
parameters of the employee’s unique
tasks or working environment.
Finally, some commenters wanted
topics added to the curriculum. Two
commenters suggested the training focus
on civil liberties, and integrate
100 For
further discussion, see 81 FR at 91361.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
community policing principles. Other
proposed topics included how to
respond to an attack, high-jacking, and/
or kidnapping scenario; self-defense
training; specified training on high-risk
events; training on accessing and
interpreting situations; and
development of communication skills.
Commenters suggested the training
address issue of civil rights and
liberties, expressing concerns about
training employees to identify
individuals as threats based on their
socioeconomic status. One commenter
specifically cautioned against enabling
transit security personnel to profile
riders based on race or religion, and
suggested personnel should first be
trained to respect rights of all
individuals, and should also be trained
in effective measures not involving
‘‘stop and frisk,’’ or similar measures.
TSA response: TSA believes the
required security-training topics
(covering prepare, observe, assess, and
response) will provide a baseline of
security awareness to enhance the
overall safety and security of passenger
and cargo transported by rail and
highway. This type of security
awareness does not inconvenience
passengers or undermine their safety. It
does, however, enhance passenger
security. Furthermore, nothing in the
rule empowers employees to engage in
racial profiling or conduct police
operations. TSA will not approve a
training curriculum encouraging
employees to conduct racial profiling or
report threats based on socioeconomic
status.
Finally, the regulatory requirements
for training content provide flexibility to
owner/operators to develop programs
appropriate to their operational
environment, including known threats
and vulnerabilities. As a result, training
may include how to identify threats
such as a potential hijackers and how to
prepare and use the required training
during high-profile events (including
appropriate communications with the
public and first responders). The
requirements of this rule will enhance
such targeted, optional training. The
rule’s requirements will result in
employees possessing an understanding
of the norm for their operational
environment, the skills and knowledge
necessary to identify anomalies
indicating a potential threat, and the
capability to respond appropriately.
Comments on training to satisfy
regulatory requirements: Several
commenters requested more specificity
regarding what type of training will
satisfy the curriculum requirements,
including a list of examples. One
commenter asked for guidance on what
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
type of training will satisfy the
curriculum requirement concerning
‘‘defending oneself.’’
TSA response: In the past, TSA has
worked with the relevant associations
and FEMA to identify training to
address specific security needs and
anticipates continuing to do so as it
relates to the requirements in this rule.
In addition, TSA has partnered with
national associations and industry to
cooperatively develop security training
curriculum and programs. While TSA
does not intend to endorse specific
third-party training programs owner/
operators may submit these programs to
TSA as part of their security training
programs. TSA will assess all submitted
programs to ensure compliance with the
rule’s requirements before approving the
training program. As to the comment on
providing more information on
‘‘defending oneself,’’ the rule does not
require training on how to use selfdefense devices or other protective
equipment provided by the employer.
TSA assumes the employer’s standard
employee training will address these
issues at the time the equipment is
provided (one commenter noted the
Occupational Health and Safety
Administration (OSHA) requires
employees to receive training in the use
of (PPE) required by their job functions).
Comments on impact of TSAdeveloped security training materials:
One commenter suggested that TSA
develop an annual course based on
current threat and intelligence rather
than requiring companies to create
annual plans for TSA approval.
Similarly, several commenters suggested
that TSA create a baseline curriculum,
such as a video, that would meet the
regulatory requirements. One
commenter suggested that companies
could voluntarily submit supplemental
training that exceeds the recommended
baseline training that is specific to their
mode. One commenter, however,
specifically stated that TSA’s First
ObserverTM training materials are
inadequate.
TSA response: This rule does not
require owner/operators to submit
updated plans every year. Updates, or
amendments, are only required for
specific reasons, as discussed in section
IV.B.
In regard to the comments regarding
use of First ObserverTM, TSA notes that
the First ObserverTM program most
familiar to regulated parties was created
primarily for highway and motor carrier
professionals. While TSA assessed that
First ObserverTM covers three of the
required training elements for OTRB
owner/operators, the program was not
created to specifically address this rule
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
nor was it meant to be applicable to all
surface modes of transportation.
At the time the NPRM was published,
TSA anticipated expanding the First
ObserverTM program to incorporate
additional training material. Since
publication of the NPRM, however, TSA
initiated development of new materials
to address three of the required training
program components (Observe, Assess,
and Respond) that are relevant to all
owner/operators within the three
covered modes.101 While these videos
are a new product intended to
specifically align with the rule’s
requirements, they build upon previous
training developed by TSA under First
ObserverTM and other transportation
security-related training programs. TSA
adapted this previously developed
information, and supplemented it as
necessary, to ensure the videos address
as many of the required training
elements as can be met through a onesize fits all training video. These
materials may eventually be placed
under the First ObserverTM umbrella,
but will not be the same as the original
program.
As noted in the NPRM, use of TSAdeveloped and provided material is
optional. TSA developed these materials
to further reduce the burden of
compliance to owner/operators with a
resource they may use to meet a
majority of the security training
requirements under this rule. These
videos will be made available to all of
TSA’s surface stakeholders.
TSA is aware that not all owner/
operators will choose to use TSAprovided material, particularly if they
are incorporating their training into
existing training programs to meet other
Federal, state, or local training
requirements. Owner/operators may
need to develop and/or provide
supplemental material to ensure the
training provided meets all of the
training requirements, specifically
reflecting nuances within the operations
of a particular owner/operator or a
particular sub-set or location of these
operations. This additional information
must be identified and included in the
security training program submitted to
TSA. As the videos use is not
mandatory, the economic analysis does
not account for them when estimating
costs of compliance.
101 The ‘‘Prepare’’ element of the required training
curriculum is, by its nature, specific to each the
operations of each owner/operator covered by the
rule. As such, this element cannot be addressed in
material intended to be applicable to multiple
owner/operators.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
E. Freight Rail Specific Issues
1. Applicability of Security Training
Requirements (§ 1580.101)
Comments: Several commenters
expressed concern related to the
designated list of HTUAs in Appendix
A to part 1580. One commenter believed
the training is necessary for all frontline
employees, not just those employed by
higher-risk operations. Another noted
that improving security at some
locations may result in terrorists
redirecting their operations to softer
targets not covered under the rule. The
commenter suggested the rule should
require security training at all
transportation locations. The
commenter specifically recommended
that the rule cover freight, passenger
rail, and public transit systems.
TSA response: As discussed in the
NPRM, TSA’s risk-based determinations
for applicability are consistent with the
focus of the 9/11 Act’s requirements on
higher-risk operations.102 This riskbased focus is reflected in the statutory
requirement for the training to be
provided to frontline employees, not all
employees, and placing the security
training requirements within the context
of a broader security program focusing
on higher-risk operations.
While hardening one target could
make those with nefarious intent believe
that other targets are more vulnerable,
the threat (an adversary’s intent and
capability) is only one of the critical
factors affecting risk (which also
includes vulnerabilities and
consequences). The risk analysis
underlying the applicability for freight
railroad is heavily weighted to address
concerns regarding the vulnerabilities
and consequences. TSA determined the
highest risk freight railroads are those
designated as Class I, based on their
revenue and the Nation’s dependence
on these systems to move both freight in
support of critical sectors and
passengers. All Class I railroads must
provide security training. Similarly,
some shortlines (also known as Class II
or Class III railroads) are higher-risk
because of what they transport and
where they transport it. As noted above,
and in the NPRM, certain materials have
a higher-risk associated with them based
on the potential consequences should
they be released.103 The likelihood of
catastrophic consequences is greater in
HTUAs. By reducing the vulnerability
through increased security training, the
rule’s applicability is intended to reduce
the risk for these systems without
increasing the risk for others. Finally,
102 See
103 See
PO 00000
81 FR 91355 et seq.
id.
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16481
TSA encourages owner/operators not
within the scope of the rule’s
applicability to use the regulatory
requirements as guidance for voluntarily
implementing a security training
program for its security-sensitive and
other employees, whether by using
TSA-developed programs or through its
own training. These owner/operators
may contact TSA through the numbers
and addressed identified in under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, or
through modal associations (with whom
TSA regularly interacts).
2. Chain of Custody and Control
Requirements (§ 1580.205)
Comments: Two commenters asserted
threat assessments indicate freight
railroads face a lower terrorist threat.
The commenters concluded the transfer
of custody procedures should only
apply at elevated or imminent terrorism
levels.
TSA response: TSA understands this
comment to be about the chain of
custody requirements currently required
by 49 CFR 1580.107 and not this rule’s
requirements to provide training on the
chain of custody procedures employed
by the railroad. For the underlying
chain of custody requirements, this rule
merely relocates the requirement within
the CFR; TSA did not propose
modifying them. TSA thus considers
these comments pertaining to
substantive changes to the chain of
custody requirements as beyond the
scope of this rulemaking. Consistent,
however, with the requirements of
Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the
Regulatory Reform Agenda (Feb. 24,
2017), TSA is addressing this comment
as a suggested revision to existing
regulations.
Under 49 U.S.C. 114(l)(3), TSA is
required to consider the potential
impact on security before it rescinds or
revises a regulatory requirement.
Transfer of custody requirements are
intended to prevent access by
unauthorized persons to railcars loaded
with certain chemicals or materials may
constitute an immediate threat to life or
health if released into the environment.
TSA does not agree that transfer of
custody procedures should only apply
to elevated or immediate threat risk. The
state of the terrorism alert level is not
related to the need to deny
unauthorized persons access to railcars
loaded with hazardous materials;
unauthorized persons must be denied
access to such railcars at all times.
Terrorism alert levels are increased
when there is reason to believe a
heightened threat of an attack exists or
may exist. Accessible freight cars
containing hazardous materials may be
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16482
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
used to mount an attack spontaneously,
without elaborate planning or
premeditation on the part of the
attacker, and therefore without warning
or reason to elevate the threat level in
advance of the attack. Current ‘‘chain of
custody’’ requirements accomplish this
objective and are retained in the final
rule.
F. Public Transportation and Passenger
Railroad Specific Issues
Comments: Several commenters
questioned the scope of the rulemaking
in relation to PTPR. Commenters
specifically questioned TSA’s criteria
for identifying the current PTPR
systems, and asked whether TSA will
identify additional PTPR systems in the
future. One commenter urged TSA to
reconsider limiting the applicability to
46 systems rather than all PTPR
systems, as the cost-savings is far
outweighed by the cost-effectiveness
achieved by meaningful training of all
frontline transit employees in securitysensitive positions. One commenter
asked if the Federal Transit
Administration’s (FTA’s) impending
repeal of 49 CFR part 659 would mean
only TSA’s identified ‘‘higher risk’’
PTPR systems will have security
training requirements, vulnerability
assessments, and security planning
requirements after April 15, 2019.
TSA response: As noted above, TSA’s
risk-based determinations for
applicability are consistent with the 9/
11 Act’s requirements regarding higherrisk operations. This focus on risk is
reflected in the statutory requirement
for training frontline employees, not all
employees, and placement of the
security training requirements within
the context of a broader security
program required to focus on higher-risk
operations. In questioning TSA’s criteria
for its determination, the commenter
provided no specific information
regarding TSA’s perceived failures nor
provided alternatives. If TSA decides to
expand the rule’s applicability to
additional systems, it would do so
through appropriate rulemaking
procedures consistent with TSA’s
statutory authorities and rulemaking
requirements.
TSA cannot confirm the rule will
continue to be as cost-effective if the
number of PTPR systems is expanded.
In the NPRM and Final RIA, TSA
performed an alternatives analysis
(Section 5.2 of the Final RIA), in which
one of the alternatives expanded the
scope of affected PTPR owner/operators
from 47 (46 PTPR systems + Amtrak) to
253. This alternative would result in the
costs of compliance for the PTPR
industry to increase from $2.44 million
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
to $14.93 million (both annualized and
discounted at 7 percent).104 It seems
unlikely that expanding security
training to an additional 206 owner/
operators, to include operations not
considered higher-risk, will yield a
corresponding reduction in risk. As
previously noted, TSA encourages
owner/operators not covered by the
rule’s applicability to use the regulatory
requirements as guidance for voluntarily
implementing a security training
program for its frontline employees,
whether by using TSA-developed
programs or through its own training.
Finally, the nexus between the FTA’s
requirements and this rule are more
fully discussed in the NPRM.105
G. OTRB Specific Issues
1. Definition of Security-Sensitive
Employees (§ 1584.3 and Appendix B to
Part 1584)
Comments: Two commenters
expressed concern that bus companies
do not always know in advance exactly
which buses will be used for which
service. One of the commenters
suggested it would be easiest for their
company if all drivers take part in
mandatory training, regardless of their
normal scheduled route, as there is
potential for a driver to be transferred to
a different assignment at the last
minute. Another commenter cautioned
the rule may cause confusion as to
which employees of an operation
should be trained, and asked for
clarification whether an operator should
only train front line employees servicing
identified destinations. The commenter
explained a scheduled service operator
may offer charter, shuttle bus, or other
transportation services, in addition to
fixed-route service to areas that are
outside the UASI areas.
TSA response: To address the request
for clarity, TSA recommends owner/
operators first determine whether they
have operations placing them within the
scope of the rule’s applicability, i.e.,
whether the owner/operator provides
fixed-route service to, through, or from
one of the areas identified in Appendix
A to part 1584. If so, the owner/operator
must provide security training to all of
its security-sensitive employees. The
question of which employees receive
training is not based on where the
employee’s job takes them, but what
their job requires them to do. Thus, all
employees who have a commercial
driver’s license and operate an OTRB for
the owner/operator must receive
104 See Final Rule RIA, tables 40 and 91 for total
costs to PTPR in the preferred alternative and
Alternative 2 (expanded population), respectively.
105 See 81 FR at 91365.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
security training, not just those who
drive an OTRB to, through, or from an
identified area.
The comments provided conflicting
opinions on whether requiring all
security-sensitive employees to receive
the training, regardless of where the
individual operates, is necessary. TSA is
requiring that all security-sensitive
employees must be trained, but notes
that owner/operators may request
alternative measures under the
procedures in § 1570.117.
2. Applicability (§ 1584.101)
Comments on threat: One commenter
disagreed that vehicle borne improvised
explosive devices (VBIED) are the
greatest and most likely attack risk,
citing recent terrorism-related incidents
involving vehicle ramming.
TSA response: Within the context of
the 9/11 Act’s mandate for TSA to
require OTRB owner/operators to
provide security training to their
employees, TSA’s risk analysis focused
on what risks were greatest for OTRB,
not all forms of motor vehicles. To the
extent the commenter is suggesting use
of an OTRB for vehicle ramming is
greater than the risk of using an OTRB
as a VBIED, the distinction would have
no impact on how TSA uses its risk
analysis to determine applicability as
the vulnerabilities and consequences for
OTRBs are similar. To the extent the
commenter is referring to other types of
motor carrier-related threats, TSA notes
that security awareness training is a
valuable countermeasure against vehicle
ramming attacks. Because large
commercial vehicles can do more
damage in a ramming attack, teaching
large vehicle operators to be more
sensitive to and aware of possible
hijacking or other attempts to procure
their vehicle can mitigate losses and
damages.
Comments on applicability: Several
commenters expressed concern with the
scope and applicability of the rule. One
commenter agreed with the definition of
‘‘higher risk’’ and their application to
the rule, but urged TSA to ensure DHS
provides consistency throughout all its
components regarding ‘‘the factors that
could make an OTRB a potential target.’’
One commenter suggested that UASI
may be ‘‘over kill,’’ and suggested only
10 areas. Another expressed concern
that as UASI areas are re-determined
annually, the prioritized locations could
change frequently, which would result
in an undue burden on operators and
foster soft targets as resources are
shifted to address new threats. Finally,
commenters expressed concern that the
rule may create ‘‘soft targets’’ which
could be exploited by terrorists.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
TSA response: As discussed in the
NPRM,106 TSA’s risk-based
determinations for applicability are
consistent with the focus of the 9/11
Act’s requirements on higher-risk
operations. This is reflected in the
statutory requirement for the training to
be provided to frontline employees, not
all employees, and placing the security
training requirements within the context
of a broader security program that
focuses on higher-risk operations.
While hardening one target could
make those with nefarious intent believe
that other targets are more vulnerable,
the threat (an adversary’s intent and
capability) is only one of the critical
factors affecting risk (which also
includes vulnerabilities and
consequences). The risk analysis
underlying the applicability for OTRB is
heavily weighted to address concerns
regarding the vulnerabilities and
consequences, including the
vulnerability associated with scheduled
service and the consequences should an
attack occur in highly populated urban
areas.
Because the risk involving an OTRB
as a VBIED is primarily to the targeted
urban area, TSA relied on a risk model
developed by DHS to determine highest
risk urban areas for the UASI grant
program. This model has been approved
by the Secretary of Homeland Security
for calculating the relative risk of urban
areas in order to inform UASI allocation
determinations.107 As with PTPR, TSA
drew the line for applicability where
there is a natural and significant break
in the funding allocations as informed
by the risk methodology.
As to concern about the impact of
future changes to UASI designations,
that concern is misplaced. While TSA
used the UASI designations to develop
its applicability determination, the term
UASI is not used in the applicability.
Instead, the rule applies to those
providing fixed-route service to,
through, or from one of the areas
identified in Appendix A to part 1584.
The table in this appendix includes
specific counties to avoid any potential
confusion regarding applicability.
Finally, TSA does not believe the
regulation creates soft targets. By
reducing the vulnerability through
increased security training, the rule’s
applicability is intended to reduce the
risk for these systems without
increasing the risk for others. Finally,
TSA notes that it encourages owner/
106 See general discussion on applicability, id. at
91355 et seq. See also OTRB specific discussion, id.
at 91358 et seq.
107 As the risk methodology relies upon SSI, it is
not available to the public.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
operators not covered by the rule’s
applicability to use the regulatory
requirements as guidance for voluntarily
implementing a security training
program for its frontline employees,
whether by using TSA-developed
programs or through its own training.
H. Comments Beyond Scope of
Rulemaking
TSA received several comments
regarding issuance of self-defense
devices, such as tasers and mace,
ranging from suggesting that we require
employers to issue them to suggesting
that we prohibit it. Either suggestion is
beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
The comment indicating that OSHA
mandates employee training in the use
of PPE, if required by their job
functions, has already been noted.
VIII. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) requires Federal agencies to
consider the impact of paperwork and
other information collection burdens
imposed on the public and, under the
provisions of PRA sec. 3507(d), obtain
approval from the OMB for each
collection of information it conducts,
sponsors, or requires through
regulations.108
OMB has approved a related
information collection request for
contact information for RSCs and
alternate RSCs, as well as the reporting
of significant security concerns by
freight railroad carriers, passenger
railroad carriers, and rail transit
systems.109
This final rule, however, contains
new information-collection activities
subject to the PRA. Accordingly, TSA
has submitted the following information
requirements to OMB for its review. The
Supporting Statement for this
information collection request is
available in the docket for this
rulemaking.
Title: Security Training Programs for
Surface Mode Employees.
Summary: This final rule requires the
following information collections:
First, owner/operators identified in 49
CFR 1580.101, 1582.101, and 1584.101
are required to submit a security
training program for security-sensitive
employees that meets the requirements
of subpart B of 49 CFR part 1580,
subpart B of 49 CFR part 1582, and
subpart B of 49 CFR part 1584.
Additionally, they are required to
submit a request to amend their security
108 Public Law 96–511, 94 Stat. 2812 (Dec. 11,
1980), as codified at 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
109 See OMB Control No. 1652–0051.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16483
training program if certain changes are
made to their operations or if notified by
TSA that an amendment is necessary.
For purposes of its burden estimates,
TSA assumes such modification will
occur every three years.
Second, the public transportation bus
systems and OTRB owner/operators to
whom the final rule applies would be
required to obtain personal and contact
information from their designated
security coordinator, and alternate, and
submit such records to TSA.
Third, respondents would be required
to retain individual training records on
security-sensitive employees at the
location(s) specified in each
respondent’s respective security training
program, and make such records
available to TSA upon request.
Fourth, the public transportation bus
systems and OTRB owner/operators to
whom the final rule applies would be
required to report significant security
concerns, which includes incidents,
suspicious activities, and/or threat
information.
Use of: This information will be used
to support the implementation of this
final rule, including to TSA
determinations that security training
programs satisfy the requirements in
this final rule. Recordkeeping
requirements are necessary for TSA to
verify employee training is in
compliance with the final rule. Security
coordinator information supports
respondent communications with TSA
concerning intelligence information,
security related activities, and incident
or threat response with appropriate law
enforcement and emergency response
agencies. The reporting of significant
security concerns supports the analysis
of trends and indicators of developing
threats and potential terrorist activity.
Respondents (including number of):
The likely respondents to this
information collection are the owner/
operators of covered surface modes,
which are estimated to incur
approximately 579,070 responses over
the next 3 years (including 145,731
freight railroad responses; 254,754 PTPR
responses; and 178,586 OTRB company
responses), which amounts to an
average annual cost of $0.93 million.
Frequency: TSA estimates that
following initial submission, security
training programs would need to be
periodically updated as appropriate.
Security training records would need to
be updated after each training
occurrence. Security coordinator
information would need to be updated
as appropriate. Significant security
concerns would be reported as they
occur. TSA estimates inspections for
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16484
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
estimate is approximately 12,318 hours.
Table 5 shows the information
collections and corresponding hour
burdens for entities falling under the
requirements of the final rule.
employee training documentation
recordkeeping, and incident reporting is
estimated to be 2,729 hours for freight
railroads; 3,311 hours for PTPRs; and
6,278 hours for OTRB companies. The
total average annual time burden
compliance would occur at a rate of one
inspection per year per owner/operator.
Annual Burden Estimate: The average
yearly burden for security training
program development and submission,
security coordinator submission,
TABLE 5—PRA HOURS OF BURDEN
Time per
response
(hours)
Collection
Number of responses
Year 1
Year 2
3-Year time
burden
Year 3
Average
annual time
burden
Initial Security Training Program Development and Submission
Freight Rail ...............................................
PTPR ........................................................
OTRB (Large to Medium) ........................
OTRB (Small) ...........................................
152
88
44
28
33
47
31
174
0
0
1
3
0
0
1
3
5,016
4,136
1,439
5,062
1,672
1,379
480
1,687
0
0
1
3
743
1,058
736
4,068
248
353
245
1,356
6
66
32
299
11
100
4,750
23,173
5,142
4,764
23,251
5,206
2,428
4,011
825
809
1,337
275
Modified Security Training Program Development and Submission
Freight Rail ...............................................
PTPR ........................................................
OTRB (Large to Medium) ........................
OTRB (Small) ...........................................
25
25
25
25
30
42
28
157
0
0
1
3
Security Coordinator Information Submission
PTPR ........................................................
OTRB .......................................................
0.5
0.5
52
467
6
65
Employee Training Documentation Recordkeeping
Freight Rail ...............................................
PTPR ........................................................
OTRB .......................................................
0.017
0.017
0.017
136,155
194,219
39,147
Incident Reporting
PTPR ........................................................
OTRB .......................................................
0.05
0.05
4,652
41,881
4,652
42,691
4,652
43,516
698
6,404
233
2,135
Total Burden (responses) .................
........................
........................
........................
........................
579,070
193,023
Total Burden (hours) .........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
36,953
12,318
B. Economic Impact Analyses
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
1. Regulatory Impact Analysis Summary
Changes to Federal regulations must
undergo several economic analyses.
First, Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review,110 as
supplemented by Executive Order
13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review,111 directs each
Federal agency to propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the
intended regulation justify its costs.
Second, E.O. 13771, Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs,112 requires agencies to identify at
least two regulations to be eliminated
for every new regulation, and also
requires that the cost of planned
regulations be prudently managed and
110 58
FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011).
112 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017).
111 76
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
controlled through a budgeting process.
Third, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 113 requires agencies to consider
the economic impact of regulatory
changes on small entities. Fourth, the
Trade Agreement Act of 1979 114
prohibits agencies from setting
standards that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States. Fifth, UMRA requires
agencies to prepare a written assessment
of the costs, benefits, and other effects
of proposed or final rules that include
a Federal mandate likely to result in the
expenditure by State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
annually (adjusted for inflation).115
113 Public Law 96–354, 94 Stat. 1164 (Sept. 19,
1980) as codified at 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
114 Public Law 96–39, 93 Stat. 144 (July 26, 1979),
codified at 19 U.S.C. 2531–2533.
115 Supra n. 63.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
13711 Assessments
Under the requirements of Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563, agencies must
assess the costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, if regulation
is necessary, select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). These requirements were
supplemented by Executive Order
13563, which emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. Under Executive Order
13711, Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs,116
agencies must identify whether a
116 82
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017).
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
rulemaking is a regulatory or
deregulatory action.
In conducting these analyses, TSA has
determined:
1. This rulemaking is a significant
regulatory action within the meaning of
Executive Order 12866 and a regulatory
action under Executive Order 13771.
TSA has determined that this
rulemaking is not economically
significant. The rule will not result in an
effect on the economy of $100 million
or more in any year of the analysis. The
total annualized costs of the final rule
over a perpetual time period using a 7
percent discount rate, in 2016 dollars,
and discounted back to 2016 is $5.28
million. The rule will not adversely
affect the economy, interfere with
actions taken or planned by other
agencies, or generally alter the
budgetary impact of any entitlements.
2. TSA prepared a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), which
finds that this rulemaking would likely
have a regulatory cost that exceeds one
percent of revenue for 47 small
entities—1 freight rail and 46 OTRB
owner/operators—of the total 200 small
entities that would be regulated by the
final rule.
3. This rulemaking would not
constitute a barrier to international
trade.
4. This rulemaking does not impose
an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments, or on the private
sector under UMRA.
In the NPRM RIA, TSA estimated that
the rule would cost $157.27 million
over ten years, discounted at 7 percent.
In the Final RIA, TSA updated its
benefit-cost analysis and estimated this
regulation will cost $52.30 million over
ten years, discounted at 7 percent. The
change in cost estimate from the NPRM
RIA to the Final RIA is due to the
following:
• The final rule will require affected
surface mode employees to undergo
security training at least once every
three years, which is a change in
frequency from the annual training
requirement in the NPRM. TSA updated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
training burden cost estimates to reflect
the final rule’s triennial training cycle.
• TSA updated employee population
estimates in each of the three industries
regulated by this final rule. In all three
modes, the final rule employee
population estimates decreased from the
estimates in the NPRM: (1) The
population of impacted freight rail
employees decreased based on an
updated source.117 (2) The population of
impacted PTPR employees decreased as
a result of TSA using more detailed
population data in this Final RIA, as
well as an update in the percentage of
employees performing security-sensitive
roles. (3) The population of impacted
OTRB employees decreased as a result
of reevaluating the population of
impacted OTRB owner/operators from
the NPRM dataset. TSA made revisions
based on new information about the
owner/operator’s operations (such as the
lack of scheduled services), as well as
the consolidation and closure of owner/
operators within the industry. This reevaluation resulted in eight fewer OTRB
owner/operators than previously
estimated in the NPRM, which in turn
meant fewer employees were impacted.
• TSA updated its estimates of
compensation rates, employee turnover
rates, and various other inputs. TSA has
reviewed all the inputs used in the
NPRM RIA and updated them to ensure
that the Final RIA uses the most
recently available data.
• TSA added the cost for owner/
operators to develop their own training
programs in its primary cost analysis; in
the NPRM RIA, only Alternative 2 made
this assumption. In the primary cost
analysis of the NPRM RIA, TSA
assumed owner/operators would use a
video provided by TSA, free of charge,
to meet a majority of the training
requirements. TSA still plans to make
this video available, however for the
purpose of presenting the full range of
possible costs for owner/operators from
117 The Final RIA used the 2017 version of ‘‘AAR
Railroad Facts’’ versus the 2014 version used in the
NPRM.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16485
the final rule, TSA decided to include
the cost of developing a custom training
program in the Final RIA. Because of
this change, TSA increased the time
burden for owner/operators to develop a
training program. TSA also increased
the time burden for TSA to review,
modify, and re-review these programs.
Lastly, TSA increased its estimate of
hours spent per inspection because TSA
believes Transportation Security
Inspectors will need more time to
inspect owner/operators on the
particulars of their unique training
program.
• TSA revised its assumption that
owner/operators will, on average,
update their training program every five
years (as assumed in the NPRM RIA) to
every three years. TSA made this change
because it better aligns with the new
assumption that owner/operators would
create their own training program. TSA
assumes a custom training program
would involve more owner/operatorspecific circumstantial changes and
those would occur, on average, more
often. This change increased the
estimated cost to owner/operators and
TSA because they will, respectively,
submit and review training programs
more frequently within a ten-year
period.
• TSA added the cost for a name
check of new security coordinators
against its Terrorist Screening Database.
This cost is absorbed by TSA, not
owner/operators nor the security
coordinators.
• TSA revised its time burden
estimate for recordkeeping from 15
seconds to 1 minute. This more closely
aligns to previous estimates TSA has
made for other employee-specific
recordkeeping requirements.
Table 6 shows the cost components
that TSA expects industry and
Government will incur from
implementing the final rule. This table
compares these cost components to their
respective estimates in the NPRM and
describes the changes made from the
original analysis.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16486
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 6—10-YEAR TOTAL COST OF NPRM VS FINAL RULE
[Discounted at 7 percent, in $ thousands]
NPRM and FR comparison
Requirements
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
NPRM
Final rule
Significant change from
NPRM to final rule
Requirement to train security-sensitive employees on required elements (one of the elements is expanded for
freight rail) of security
training.
Changed cost estimate to
reflect three-year training cycle. Updated and
refined population data
of security-sensitive
employees. Overall estimate of affected employees decreased
from the NPRM.
Added the cost for creating custom training
plans; TSA previously,
assumed they would
use the TSA-provided
video.
Added the TSA cost to
perform a name check
of new security coordinators against the Terrorist Screening Database.
Difference
Training Cost ......
1580.113,
1582.113, and
1584.113.
$152,277
$43,429
($108,848)
Training Plan ......
1570.109 ...........
1,653
4,372
2,718
Security Coordinator.
1570.201 ...........
77
48
(29)
Incident Reporting.
1570.203 ...........
2,052
2,404
353
Recordkeeping ...
1570.121 ...........
592
875
283
Inspections .........
1570.9 ...............
622
1,175
553
Total Costs ..
...........................
157,274
52,303
(104,971)
TSA has prepared an analysis of its
estimated costs and benefits,
summarized in the following
paragraphs. The OMB Circular A–4
Accounting Statement for this final rule
is in section VIII.B.3. When estimating
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Description
Section
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
Requirement to submit a
training program to
TSA. Costs include
planning, drafting, review and submission.
Requirement to assign a
security coordinator
and an alternate to
serve as a security liaison with TSA. Costs
include initial and updated submissions
from security coordinator turnover.
Requirement to report
significant security concerns within 24 hours
of initial discovery.
TSA assumes incident
reporting will occur
telephonically.
Requirement to maintain
security training
records for each individual trained. These
records may be stored
either electronically or
printed on paper and
filed.
Availability for inspection
by TSA for compliance
with the final rule.
Costs assume annual
inspections for each
owner/operator; industry cost to prepare for
and host TSA inspections. and presentation
of training records and
program curriculum
when requested by
TSA during inspection.
the cost of a rulemaking, agencies
typically estimate future expected costs
imposed by a regulation over a period
of analysis. For this rule’s period of
analysis, TSA uses a 10-year period of
analysis to estimate the initial and
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Included additional postcall administrative
costs for TSA.
(1) Decreased cost associated with number of
records due to reduced
frequency of training
and (2) increased the
time burden per record
from 15 seconds to 1
minute. This estimate
is also more aligned
with previous estimates
TSA made for recordkeeping of other vetting programs.
No significant changes.
Cost difference due to
updates in wages and
population estimates.
recurring costs of the regulated surface
mode owner/operators and new owner/
operators that are expected due to
industry growth.
TSA concluded the following about
the current, or baseline, training
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16487
environment for freight rail, public
transportation and passenger railroad
(PTPR), and OTRB employees (see
section 1.8 of the RIA placed in the
docket for further detailed information
on the current baseline):
There are 574 U.S. freight rail owners/
operators and are composed of 7 Class
I, 21 Class II, and 546 Class III
railroads.118 A total of 33 (7 Class I, 8
Class II, and 18 Class III) out of the 574
U.S. freight rail owner/operators carry
RSSM through an HTUA and would be
affected by the final rule.119 These 33
freight rail owner/operators provide
security awareness 120 and chain of
custody and control 121 trainings to their
employees. These trainings address two
of the required elements of security
training required by the final rule in
§ 1580.115 (Security training and
knowledge for security-sensitive
employees: Prepare and Assess).
Additionally, freight rail owner/
operators are already required to comply
with the requirements to assign security
coordinators and report significant
security concerns to TSA under current
49 CFR 1580. Table 7 below identifies
the requirements of the final rule
implemented by freight rail owner/
operators. The check marked items in
the table represent existing
requirements under PHMSA’s
regulations (see 49 CFR 172.704 and
1580.107) and, therefore, do not
represent additional burden to the
freight rail owners/operators.
There are nearly 6,800 public
transportation organizations in the
United States.122 Of these, 47 PTPR
owner/operators 123 fall within the
applicability of the final rule. Twentyfour of these 47 PTPR owner/operators
effectively provide training to their
employees on security awareness and
employee- and company-specific
security programs and measures.124 This
training address two of the required
elements of security training required by
the final rule in § 1582.115 (Prepare and
Assess). Additionally, 24 PTPR owner/
operators with rail operations are
already required to comply with the
requirements to assign security
coordinators and report significant
security concerns to TSA under current
49 CFR part 1580. Table 8 below
identifies the requirements of the final
rule already implemented by PTPR
owner/operators. The check marked
items in the table represent existing
requirements under 49 CFR part 1580
and, therefore do not represent
additional burden to the freight rail
owners/operators.
118 AAR, ‘‘Railroad Facts, 2017 Edition,’’ at pg.3
(2017).
119 TSA used its railcar tracking system that
monitors toxic inhalant hazard cars, the Rail Asset
Integrated Logistics System, (RAILS), to identify
freight rail owner/operators that transported one or
more shipments of RSSM during the period in
calendar year 2017.
120 As required by PHMSA. See 49 CFR 172.704.
121 In place because of the chain of custody
requirement in 49 CFR 1580.107.
122 APTA, ‘‘2016 Public Transportation Fact
Book’’ (Feb. 2017), available at https://
www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/
FactBook/2016-APTA-Fact-Book.pdf.
123 TSA elicited and used input from SMEs in its
Surface Division, combined with data from the
Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) National
Transit Database (NTD) to identify the 47 PTPR
owner/operators.
124 Agencies identified using latest evaluation
from TSA’s BASE assessment. Information on BASE
assessment can be found at: https://www.tsa.gov/
news/top-stories/2015/09/21/transit-agencies-earnhigh-ratings-through-base-program.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
ER23MR20.002
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
16488
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
There are 2,990 U.S. companies in the
motorcoach industry.125 Of these,
205 126 fall within the applicability of
the final rule. Three of the 205 are large
OTRB companies that currently use the
TSA-supplied First ObserverTM
program, which covers a majority of the
9/11 Act security training requirements,
to train their employees. This training
addresses three of the security training
elements of this final rule (Observe,
Assess, and Respond). Table 9 identifies
the requirements of this final rule
implemented by OTRB owner/operators.
The check marked items in the table
represent the training components
already covered by the First ObserverTM
program and, therefore do not represent
additional burden to the OTRB owners/
operators currently using this program
compared to the ‘‘no-action’’
baseline.127 In Appendix A of the RIA,
however, TSA has also monetized the
cost of their current participation in
First ObserverTM. TSA estimated this
cost at $0.57 million to these owner/
operators over 10 years (discounted at 7
percent).128
TSA summarizes the costs of the final
rule to be borne by four affected parties:
freight railroad owner/operators, PTPR
owner/operators, OTRB owner/
operators, and TSA. As displayed in
Table 10, TSA estimates the 10-year
total cost of this final rule to be $73.17
million undiscounted, $62.82 million
discounted at 3 percent, and $52.30
million discounted at 7 percent. The
costs to industry (all three surface
modes) comprise approximately 96.2
percent of the total costs of the rule; and
the remaining costs are incurred by
TSA.
TABLE 10—TOTAL COST OF THE FINAL RULE BY ENTITY
[$ millions]
Total final rule cost
PTPR
OTRB
TSA
Undiscounted
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
1
2
3
$8.82
0.31
0.31
$5.74
0.67
0.67
125 American Bus Association Foundation,
‘‘Motorcoach Census 2015’’ (Oct. 9, 2017), available
at https://www.buses.org/assets/images/uploads/
pdf/Motorcoach_Census_2015.pdf.
126 TSA relied on a variety of sources to identify
the 205 owner/operators: Intercity Bus Security
Grant Program (IBSGP) applications submitted to
FEMA and reviewed by TSA, the American
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
$2.28
0.42
0.42
$0.63
0.21
0.21
Intercity Bus Riders Association (AIBRA) intercity
bus service operator list, consultations with ABA,
and internet research of websites like GotoBus.com
and other publicly available sources of information.
127 OMB, ‘‘Circular A–4,’’ at 2, available at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
omb/assets/regulatory_matters_pdf/a-4.pdf.
(‘‘Benefits and costs are defined in comparison with
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Discounted at 3%
Discounted at 7%
$16.95
1.50
1.47
$16.32
1.39
1.31
$17.46
1.60
1.61
a clearly stated alternative. This normally will be
a ‘no action’ baseline: What the world will be like
if the proposed rule is not adopted.’’)
128 OMB also requires TSA to consider a ‘‘prestatute’’ baseline. Id. at 16. Costs of First
ObserverTM have accrued since passage of the 9/11
Act and are part of this ‘‘pre-statute’’ baseline.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
ER23MR20.004
Freight rail
ER23MR20.003
Year
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
16489
TABLE 10—TOTAL COST OF THE FINAL RULE BY ENTITY—Continued
[$ millions]
Total final rule cost
Year
Freight rail
PTPR
OTRB
TSA
Undiscounted
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Total
Annualized
Discounted at 3%
Discounted at 7%
8.08
0.58
0.58
7.64
0.82
0.83
7.25
4.49
1.10
1.11
3.82
1.41
1.42
3.35
2.02
0.56
0.57
1.91
0.68
0.69
1.85
0.27
0.22
0.22
0.28
0.23
0.23
0.29
14.87
2.46
2.48
13.65
3.14
3.17
12.74
13.21
2.12
2.07
11.10
2.48
2.43
9.48
11.34
1.75
1.65
8.50
1.83
1.72
6.48
35.21
23.78
11.40
2.78
73.17
62.82
52.30
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
7.36
7.45
TSA estimates the 10-year costs to the
freight railroad industry to be $35.21
million undiscounted, $30.18 million
discounted at 3 percent, and $25.09
million discounted at 7 percent, as
displayed by cost categories in Table 11.
TSA estimates the 10-year costs to the
PTPR industry to be $23.78 million
undiscounted, $20.48 million
discounted at 3 percent, and $17.12
million discounted at 7 percent, as
displayed by cost categories in Table 12.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
ER23MR20.005
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
undiscounted, $9.74 million discounted
at 3 percent, and $8.06 million
discounted at 7 percent, as displayed by
cost categories in Table 13.
TSA estimates the 10-year costs to
TSA to be $2.78 million undiscounted,
$2.41 million discounted at 3 percent,
and $2.03 million discounted at 7
percent, as displayed by cost categories
in Table 14.
ER23MR20.007
TSA estimates the 10-year costs to the
OTRB industry to be $11.40 million
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
ER23MR20.006
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
16490
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
This final rule will enhance surface
transportation security by reducing the
risk of terrorist attacks in four ways.
First, the rule ensures employees on the
frontline of higher-risk surface
transportation systems and operations
(defined as ‘‘security-sensitive
employees’’) are trained on how to
observe, assess, and respond to a
security threat, enhancing their
capabilities to take appropriate actions
and mitigate the consequences of any
threat or incident. Second, securitysensitive employees with
responsibilities under their employer’s
security plan or for specific security
measures will be prepared through
training to perform any actions
associated with that responsibility.
Third, there will be more effective
communication between TSA and all
higher-risk operations through the
designation of security coordinators by
all higher-risk operations. Finally, the
129 See
id.
explained in the Final RIA, available in the
docket, to monetize injuries, TSA used two
approaches (depending on whether the injury was
due to exposure to hazardous chemicals). To
monetize ‘‘non-chemical’’ injuries, TSA uses
130 As
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
16491
expanded scope of owner/operators
required to report significant security
concerns will enhance TSA’s ability to
identify risks and recommend
appropriate actions based on a more
comprehensive picture of threats to
surface transportation security.
While training and the other
requirements of this final rule are not
absolute deterrents for terrorists intent
on carrying out attacks on surface
modes of transportation, TSA expects
the probability of success for such
attacks to decrease when the
requirements of this rule are fully
implemented.
TSA uses a break-even analysis to
frame the relationship between the
potential benefits of the final rule and
the costs of implementing the rule.
When it is not possible to quantify or
monetize a majority of the incremental
benefits of a regulation, OMB
recommends conducting a threshold, or
‘‘break-even’’ analysis. According to
OMB Circular No. A–4, ‘‘Regulatory
Analysis,’’ such an analysis answers the
question ‘‘How small could the value of
the non-qualified benefits be (or how
large would the value of the nonquantified costs need to be) before the
rule would yield zero net benefits?’’ 129
To conduct the break-even analysis,
TSA evaluates three composite
scenarios for each the three modes
covered by the final rule. For each
scenario, TSA calculates a total
monetary consequence from an
estimated statistical value of the human
casualties and capital replacement
resulting from the attack (see Section 4.3
of the Final RIA for a more detailed
description of these calculations;
however, many assumptions regarding
specific terrorist attacks scenarios are
SSI and cannot be publicly released).
Table 15 presents the composite or
weighted average of direct consequences
from a successful attack on each mode.
guidance from the Department of Transportation for
valuing injuries based on the Abbreviated Injury
Scale. To monetize chemical-related injuries, TSA
obtained information on the cost of medical
treatment for poisoning injuries.
131 Total Direct Consequences = (Deaths × $9.6
million VSL) + (Severe injuries × $2.55 million) +
(Moderate injuries × $0.45 million) + (Severe
chemical injuries × $43,743) + (Moderate chemical
injuries × $1,687) + Public property loss + Private
property loss + Rescue and clean-up cost.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
ER23MR20.008
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
16492
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
TSA compared the estimated direct
monetary costs of an attack to the
annualized cost (discounted at 7
percent) to industry and TSA from the
final rule for each mode to estimate how
often an attack of that nature would
need to be averted for the expected
benefits to equal estimated costs. Table
16 presents the results of the break-even
analysis for each mode. For example,
Table 16 shows that if the freight rail
training requirements in this rule
prevents one freight rail terrorist attack
every 141 years, this rule ‘‘breaks-even’’
(the benefits equal the costs).
The break-even analysis does not
include the difficult-to-quantify indirect
costs of an attack or the macroeconomic
impacts that could occur due to a major
attack. In addition to the direct impacts
of a terrorist attack in terms of lost life
and property, there are other more
indirect impacts that are difficult to
measure. As noted by Cass Sunstein in
Laws of Fear, ‘‘. . . fear is a real social
cost, and it is likely to lead to other
social costs.’’ 132 In addition, Ackerman
and Heinzerling state ‘‘. . . terrorism
‘works’ through the fear and
demoralization caused by
uncontrollable uncertainty.’’ 133 As
devastating as the direct impacts of a
successful terrorist attack can be in
terms of the immediate loss of life and
property, avoiding the impacts of the
more difficult to measure indirect
effects are also substantial benefits of
preventing a terrorist attack.
TABLE 16—BREAK-EVEN ANALYSIS RESULTS
[$ millions]
Modes
Weighted average
direct costs of a
successful attack
Annualized cost of
the final rule at
7%
Breakeven averted attack frequency
a
b
c=a÷b
Freight Rail .............................................................
PTPR ......................................................................
OTRB ......................................................................
$505.87
487.80
371.00
$3.60
2.48
1.37
One attack every 141 years.
One attack every 197 years.
One attack every 271 years.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
132 Cass
R. Sunstein, Laws of Fear at 127 (2005).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
133 Frank Ackerman and Lisa Heinzerling,
Priceless On Knowing the Price of Everything and
the Value of Nothing at 136 (2004).
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
ER23MR20.009
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
3. OMB A–4 Statement
The OMB A–4 Accounting Statement
(in Table 17) presents annualized costs
and qualitative benefits of the final rule.
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
16493
TABLE 17—OMB A–4 ACCOUNTING STATEMENT
[in $ millions, 2017 dollars]
Category
Primary estimate
Minimum
estimate
Maximum
estimate
Source citation (Final RIA,
preamble, etc.)
Benefits ($ millions)
Annualized monetized benefits (discount
rate in parentheses).
Unquantified benefits ....................................
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Final RIA
The requirements proposed in this rule produce benefits by reducing security risks through training security-sensitive surface
mode employees to identify and/or mitigate an attempted terrorist attack.
Final RIA
Costs ($ millions)
Annualized monetized costs (discount rate
in parentheses).
(7%)
(3%)
Annualized quantified, but unmonetized,
costs.
$7.45
$7.36
........................
........................
Final RIA
0
0
Final RIA
0
Qualitative costs (unquantified) ....................
N/A
Final RIA
Transfers
Annualized monetized
et’’.
From whom to whom?
Annualized monetized
et’’.
From whom to whom?
transfers: ‘‘on budg-
N/A
N/A
N/A
Final RIA
..................................
transfers: ‘‘off-budg-
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
None
Final RIA
..................................
N/A
N/A
N/A
None
Miscellaneous analyses/category .................
Effects
Effects on State, local, and/or tribal governments.
Effects on small businesses .........................
Effects on wages ..........................................
Effects on growth ..........................................
None
4. Alternatives Considered
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
In addition to the final rule, TSA also
considered two alternative policies. In
comparison to the final rule, the first
alternative (Alternative 1) removes
requirements for recordkeeping, security
incident reporting, and security
coordinators for bus-only PTPR owner/
operators. This alternative also removes
the requirement to train freight railroad
security-sensitive employees on chain of
custody and control requirements.134
The second alternative (Alternative 2)
increases the training frequency to an
annual basis and expands the
population of owners/operators to all
who operate within any UASI, which
includes the entire metropolitan
statistical area.135 All other
requirements remain the same.
134 Table 64 in the RIA found in the docket
provides a section-by section analysis of which
regulatory provisions are statutorily required and
which provisions are discretionary.
135 As previously noted, see section VII.C.4. of the
preamble to this final rule, TSA proposed an annual
recurrent training requirement in the NPRM. See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
Source citation (NPRM RIA,
preamble, etc.)
Final RIA
Prepared FRFA
None
None
Though not the least costly option,
TSA selects the requirements in this
final rule as the preferred alternative.
TSA rejected Alternative 1 because it
omitted the following important
security measures TSA proposed in the
NPRM: (1) Recordkeeping requirements
to ensure TSA can determine
compliance (all modes), (2) expanding
security coordinator requirements to
provide a security point of contact for
bus-only operations (PTPR), (3)
expanding reporting requirements for
security incidents to ensure TSA has a
more complete picture of potential
threats to surface transportation (PTPR
and OTRB); and (4) ensuring freight
railroad security-sensitive employees
with responsibilities under TSA’s chain
also 81 FR at 91348. For the NPRM, TSA also
considered an alternative to ‘‘train securitysensitive employees once every three years using
TSA-provided materials. Id. at 91379. In response
to comments, TSA is adopting a three-year
recurrent training cycle for purposes of the final
rule, making the annual recurrent training
requirement the alternative considered for purposes
of the alternatives analysis.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
FRFA (Chapter 6 RIA)
None
None
of custody and control requirements
have the necessary training to ensure
compliance with these security
measures in place since promulgation of
TSA’s Rail Security Rule.136 By
including these security measures, TSA
can ensure compliance with the rule,
obtain a complete picture of potential
threats to surface transportation across
multiple modes, and enhance
compliance with security measures
required for freight railroads.
TSA also rejected Alternative 2. As
discussed in the NPRM, TSA applied a
risk-based approach to determining
applicability of this final rule.137
Expanding the population would be
inconsistent with TSA’s commitment to
risk-based security.138 TSA is also
rejecting requiring annual recurrent
training in response to comments
136 73 FR 72129, 72130–72179 (Nov. 26, 2008).
‘‘Rail Transportation Security; Final Rule.’’
137 See supra n. 13.
138 Id..
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16494
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
received on the NPRM.139 In response to
these comments which suggested longer
time periods between training, TSA
modified the recurrent training
requirement to at least once every three
years in the final rule, and rejected the
annual recurrent training requirement in
Alternative 2.
TABLE 18—COMPARISON OF COSTS BETWEEN ALTERNATIVES
[in millions]
Initial Affected population (number of
owner/operators)
Final Rule ..................
33 Freight Rails ........
47 PTPRs .................
205 OTRBs ...............
...................................
...................................
...................................
Alternative 1 ..............
...................................
...................................
...................................
...................................
Alternative 2 ..............
69 Freight Rails ........
253 PTPRs ...............
403 OTRBs ...............
...................................
...................................
...................................
...................................
10-Year costs (in $ millions) at a 7% discount
rate
Requirements
Industry
1. Provide security training to security-sensitive employees once every three years.
2. Designate a security coordinator (expanded requirement to include bus-only
PTPR and OTRB).
3. Report significant security incidents to
TSA (expanded requirement to include
bus-only PTPR and OTRB) Maintain employee training records and.
4. Provide access to TSA and proof of compliance.
1. Provide security training to security-sensitive employees once every three years
(except for Chain of custody and control);.
2. Designate a security coordinator (expanded requirement limited to OTRB).
3. Maintain employee training records and.
4. Provide access to TSA and proof of compliance.
1. Provide annual security training to security-sensitive employees within expanded
applicability.
2. Designate a security coordinator.
3. Report significant security incidents to
TSA.
4. Maintain employee training records and.
5. Provide access to TSA and proof of compliance.
TSA
Total
$50.28
$2.03
$52.30
48.03
0.99
49.02
219.54
4.52
224.05
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
5. Regulatory Flexibility Assessment
The RFA 140 requires agencies to
consider the impacts of their rules on
small entities. TSA performed a Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)
to analyze the impact to small entities
affected by the final rule.141 The RFA
analysis presented below is a summary
of the FRFA, including the six elements
in 5 U.S.C. 604.
a. A Statement of the Need for, and
Objectives of, the Rule. Sections 1408,
1517, and 1534 of the 9/11 Act require
TSA to issue a security training rule
requiring owner/operators of various
modes of surface transportation to
provide training to frontline employees
of freight rail, PTPR, and OTRB
employees. Owner/operators are
required to submit a training program to
TSA for review that will be marked SSI.
An owner/operator must also keep
records of whether each employee has
successfully completed their training.
139 See
section VI.C.4 of this final rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:21 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
Additionally, TSA will collect security
coordinator and alternate coordinator
information from entities covered in the
final rule, as well as require reporting of
suspicious activities or incidents by
these owner/operators. TSA requests
this information from owner/operators
to be better prepared to respond to
emergencies or incidents and to have
designated points of contacts with
covered entities when information
needs to be shared or retrieved. TSA
requests reporting of security-related
incidents and suspicious activities to
assess if there is a new threat or
increased threat to the surface modes of
transportation.
b. A Statement of the Significant
Issues Raised by Public Comments in
Response to the IRFA, a Statement of
the Assessment of the Agency of Such
Issues, and a Statement of Any Changes
Made in the Proposed Rule as a Result
of Such Comments. The public did not
submit significant comments during the
140 See
PO 00000
supra n. 113.
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
comment period specifically on the
IRFA. However, elsewhere in in the
preamble of the final rule, TSA
answered public comments on the cost
estimate of the rule.
c. Description of and an Estimate of
the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Rule Will Apply or an Explanation
of Why No Such Estimate is Available.
Under the RFA, the term ‘‘small
entities’’ comprises small businesses,
not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and
are not dominant in their fields, and
small governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
Individuals and States are not
considered ‘‘small entities’’ based on the
definitions in the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601).
The PTPR owner/operators affected
by this final rule are not considered
small entities because they are either
owned/operated by governmental
jurisdictions that exceed the RFA
population threshold of 50,000 or a
141 See Chapter 6 of the Final RIA in the docket
for the full FRFA.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
business that exceeds the Small
Business Administration’s (SBA) size
threshold. Only freight rail and OTRB
owner/operators have small entities
affected by the final rule.
The final rule requires security
training for Class I freight rail owner/
operators and freight rail owner/
operators that transport RSSM in one or
more HTUAs 142 or host high-risk
passenger rail operations on their tracks.
TSA identified 33 freight railroad
entities affected by the final rule.
TSA uses the SBA size standards to
identify that 18 of the 33 freight rail
owner/operators affected by the final
rule are considered a small business.
TSA calculates that final rule’s
requirements are estimated to cost
$61.82 per employee and $18,390.32 per
16495
freight rail owner/operator. Of these 18
small freight rail owner/operators, TSA
estimates that one of these freight rail
owner/operators would likely have a
regulatory cost that exceeds one percent
of their revenue. Table 19 presents the
likely distribution of costs for small
freight rail owner/operators.
TABLE 19—COSTS AS A PERCENT OF REVENUE FOR SMALL FREIGHT RAIL OWNER/OPERATORS
Number of
entities
Revenue impact range
Percent of
entities
0% < Impact ≤ 1% ...................................................................................................................................................
1% < Impact ≤ 3% ...................................................................................................................................................
3% < Impact ≤ 5% ...................................................................................................................................................
5% < Impact ≤ 10% .................................................................................................................................................
Above 10% ..............................................................................................................................................................
17
0
1
0
0
94
0
6
0
0
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
18
100.0
TSA identified 205 OTRB owner/
operators entities affected by the final
rule. Using SBA’s size threshold, TSA
estimates that 182 OTRB owner/
operators regulated by the final rule are
considered a small business. TSA
calculates that the final rule’s
requirements are estimated to cost
$35.68 per employee and $5,759.94 per
entity to these OTRB owner/operators.
Using a relevant sample of these 143
small OTRB owner/operators, TSA
estimates that 32% of them would likely
have a regulatory cost that exceeds one
percent of their revenue. Table 20
presents the likely distribution of costs
for this sample of small OTRB owner/
operators.
TABLE 20—COSTS AS A PERCENT OF REVENUE FOR SMALL OTRB OWNER/OPERATORS
Number of
entities
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Revenue impact range
Percent of
entities
0% < Impact ≤ 1% ...................................................................................................................................................
1% < Impact ≤ 3% ...................................................................................................................................................
3% < Impact ≤ 5% ...................................................................................................................................................
5% < Impact ≤ 10% .................................................................................................................................................
Above 10% ..............................................................................................................................................................
97
36
6
4
0
68
25
4
3
0
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
143
100.0
d. The Response of the Agency to Any
Comments Filed by the Chief Counsel
for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration in Response to the
Proposed Rule, and a Detailed
Statement of Any Change Made to the
Proposed Rule in the Final Rule as a
Result of the Comments. The Small
Business Administration did not submit
any comments during the comment
period for the NPRM.
e. A Description of the Projected
Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements of the Final
Rule, Including an Estimate of the
Classes of Small Entities that Will Be
Subject to the Requirement and the
Type of Professional Skills Necessary for
Preparation of the Report or Record.
This final rule’s reporting,
recordkeeping and other compliance
requirements will include submission of
security training programs, security
coordinator and security incident
information, retention of training
records, and availability for compliance
inspections. TSA assumes that any
training program, incident report,
security coordinator package, or other
information submitted to TSA will be
completed by management-level
personnel. TSA also assumes that
owner/operators will have a manager
prepare before a TSA compliance
inspection. TSA assumes the
recordkeeping requirements of the final
rule will be fulfilled by employees with
administrative and clerical skills.
f. A Description of the Steps the
Agency has Taken to Minimize
Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities Consistent with the Stated
Objectives of Applicable Statutes,
including a Statement of the Factual,
Policy, and Legal Reasons for Selecting
the Alternative Adopted in the Final
Rule and Why Each of the Other
Significant Alternatives to the Rule
Considered by the Agency which Affect
the Impact on Small Entities was
Rejected. TSA will allow owner/
operators to develop their own training
programs (which must receive TSA
approval). TSA will give owner/
operators the flexibility to use different
training materials to satisfy the final
rule’s training requirements.
Additionally, in an effort to create a
baseline for security training and
minimize costs on regulated owner/
operators, TSA will provide training
videos to incorporate the non-entityspecific training requirements laid out
in the final rule. TSA will make these
training videos available to all owner/
operators, including small entities not
142 See Appendix A to part 1580 of this final rule
for list of HTUAs.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
16496
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
covered by the high-risk criteria, which
could be used on a voluntary basis by
entities seeking to improve their
security posture.
TSA considered two other feasible
alternatives, detailed in chapter 5 of the
Final RIA, in addition to the final rule.
Alternative 1: Requirements Limited
to Those Expressly Authorized by
Statute. In comparison to the final rule,
the first regulatory alternative TSA
considered would limit the
requirements to those expressly
authorized by the 9/11 Act or other
relevant statutory provisions, such as 49
U.S.C. 114. Under this alternative, the
applicability of owner/operators
required to comply and employees to be
trained would remain the same and the
recurrence of training would be the
same as the final rule (once every three
years), but TSA would remove the
following requirements:
• Recordkeeping (final rule requires
retention of records necessary to
validate compliance);
• Training freight rail employees on
the chain of custody procedures
required by TSA’s regulations (see
§ 1580.205 for chain of custody and
control requirements relocated from
§ 1580.107);
• Security coordinators and reporting
security incidents by bus-only PTPR
owner/operators; and
• Reporting security incidents by
OTRB owner/operators.
The alternative would still include
requirements to provide security
training to security-sensitive employees
(with the exception of chain of custody
and control) once every three years,
designating security coordinators for
OTRB owner/operators, and providing
access to TSA to inspect for compliance.
The narrower scope from this
alternative means the costs to small
businesses would be less than the final
rule. TSA rejected this alternative based
on the determination that recordkeeping
is implicitly required as it is a necessary
component of enforcing a regulation,
and the other measures are necessary for
consistent application of the TSA’s
requirements imposed to enhance
surface transportation security.
Alternative 2: Increased Population
Alternative with Program Creation
Assumptions. TSA considered a second
regulatory alternative that would require
annual training and increase the
population of owner/operators required
to comply with the final rule. For
Alternative 2, TSA considered
expanding the scope of applicability to
any freight railroad, PTPR system, or
OTRB operator operating fixed-route
service to, through, or from a UASI.
Under this alternative, TSA would
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
impose additional burdens to a
significant number of small owner/
operators, including those that TSA has
not determined to be higher-risk. This
alternative could have a
disproportionate impact upon small
entities. Alternative 2 would increase
total costs upon the regulated
community as a whole. Additionally,
TSA received comments to the NPRM
(section VI.C.4 of this preamble) that
suggested longer time periods between
training, such as two or three years. In
response to these comments, TSA
modified the recurrent training
requirement to at least once every three
years in the final rule, and rejected the
annual recurrent training requirement in
Alternative 2. TSA rejected this
alternative as it is inconsistent with the
agency’s risk-based security policy
determination to focus on higher-risk
owner/operators and commitment to
outcomes-based regulations. TSA also
rejected this alternative because of its
annual recurrent training requirement.
6. International Trade Impact
Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979
prohibits Federal agencies from
establishing any standards or engaging
in 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. TSA has
assessed the potential effect of this final
rule and has determined that it would
have only a domestic impact and
therefore no effect on any tradesensitive activity.
7. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 is intended, among other things,
to curb the practice of imposing
unfunded Federal mandates on State,
local, and tribal governments. Title II of
UMRA requires each Federal agency to
prepare a written statement assessing
the effects of any Federal mandate in a
proposed or final agency rule that may
result in a $100 million or more
expenditure (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ‘‘significant regulatory
action.’’ 143
This final rule does not contain such
a mandate. Therefore, the requirements
143 Supra
PO 00000
n. 63 as codified at 2 U.S.C. 1532.
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
in Title II of UMRA do not apply and
TSA has not prepared a statement.
C. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
TSA has analyzed this rulemaking
under the principles and criteria of
Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We
determined that this action would not
have a substantial direct 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, and therefore
would not have federalism implications.
D. Environmental Analysis
TSA has reviewed this rulemaking for
purposes of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C.
4321–4347) and has determined that
this action will not have a significant
effect on the human environment. This
action is covered by categorical
exclusion (CATEX) number A3(b) in
DHS Management Directive 023–01
(formerly Management Directive
5100.1), Environmental Planning
Program, which guides TSA compliance
with NEPA.
E. Energy Impact Analysis
The energy impact of this rulemaking
has been assessed in accordance with
the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(EPCA), Public Law 94–163, as amended
(42 U.S.C. 6362). TSA has determined
that this rulemaking is not a major
regulatory action under the provisions
of the EPCA.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 1500
Air carriers, Air transportation,
Aircraft, Airports, Bus transit systems,
Commuter bus systems, Law
enforcement officer, Maritime carriers,
Over-the-Road buses, Public
transportation, Rail hazardous materials
receivers, Rail hazardous materials
shippers, Rail transit systems, Railroad
carriers, Railroad safety, Railroads,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Transportation facility, Vessels.
49 CFR Part 1520
Air carriers, Air transportation,
Aircraft, Airports, Bus transit systems,
Commuter bus systems, Law
enforcement officer, Maritime carriers,
Over-the-Road buses, Public
transportation, Rail hazardous materials
receivers, Rail hazardous materials
shippers, Rail transit systems, Railroad
carriers, Railroad safety, Railroads,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Transportation facility, Vessels.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
49 CFR Part 1570
Commuter bus systems, Crime, Fraud,
Hazardous materials transportation,
Motor carriers, Over-the-Road bus
safety, Over-the-Road buses, Public
transportation, Public transportation
safety, Rail hazardous materials
receivers, Rail hazardous materials
shippers, Rail transit systems, Railroad
carriers, Railroad safety, Railroads,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Transportation facility, Transportation
Security-Sensitive Materials.
49 CFR Part 1580
Hazardous materials transportation,
Rail hazardous materials receivers, Rail
hazardous materials shippers, Railroad
carriers, Railroad safety, Railroads,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures.
49 CFR Part 1582
Public transportation, Public
transportation safety, Railroad carriers,
Railroad safety, Railroads, Rail transit
systems, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures.
49 CFR Part 1584
Over-the-Road bus safety, Over-theRoad buses, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security
measures.
The Amendments
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Transportation Security
Administration amends chapter XII, of
title 49, Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
Subchapter A—Administrative and
Procedural Rules
PART 1500—APPLICABILITY, TERMS,
AND ABBREVIATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 1500
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114, 5103, 40113,
44901–44907, 44913–44914, 44916–44918,
44935–44936, 44942, 46105; Pub. L. 110–53
(121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) secs. 1408 (6
U.S.C. 1137), 1501 (6 U.S.C. 1151), 1517 (6
U.S.C. 1167), and 1534 (6 U.S.C. 1184).
■
2. Revise § 1500.3 to read as follows:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
§ 1500.3 Terms and abbreviations used in
this chapter.
As used in this chapter:
Administrator means the Assistant
Secretary for Homeland Security,
Transportation Security Administration
(Assistant Secretary), who is the
highest-ranking TSA official, or his or
her designee. Administrator also means
the Under Secretary of Transportation
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
for Security identified in 49 U.S.C.
114(b).
Authorized representative means any
individual who is not a direct employee
of a person regulated under this title,
but is authorized to act on that person’s
behalf to perform measures required
under the Transportation Security
Regulations, or a TSA security program.
For purposes of this subchapter, the
term ‘‘authorized representative’’
includes agents, contractors, and
subcontractors, and employees of the
same.
Bus means any of several types of
motor vehicles used by public or private
entities to provide transportation service
for passengers.
Bus transit system means a public
transportation system providing
frequent transportation service (not
limited to morning and evening peak
travel times) for the primary purpose of
moving passengers between bus stops,
often through multiple connections (a
bus transit system does not become a
commuter bus system even if its
primary purpose is the transportation of
commuters). This term does not include
tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion
operations.
Commuter bus system means a system
providing passenger service primarily
during morning and evening peak
periods, between an urban area and
more distant outlying communities in a
greater metropolitan area. This term
does not include tourist, scenic,
historic, or excursion operations.
Commuter passenger train service
means ‘‘train, commuter’’ as defined in
49 CFR 238.5, and includes service
provided by diesel or electric powered
locomotives and railroad passenger cars
to serve an urban area, its suburbs, and
more distant outlying communities in
the greater metropolitan area. A
commuter passenger train service is part
of the general railroad system of
transportation regardless of whether it is
physically connected to other railroads.
DHS means the Department of
Homeland Security and any directorate,
bureau, or other component within the
Department of Homeland Security,
including the United States Coast
Guard.
DOT means the Department of
Transportation and any operating
administration, entity, or office within
the Department of Transportation.
Fixed-route service means the
provision of transportation service by
private entities operated along a
prescribed route according to a fixed
schedule.
General railroad system of
transportation means ‘‘the network of
standard gauge track over which goods
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16497
may be transported throughout the
nation and passengers may travel
between cities and within metropolitan
and suburban areas’’ as defined in
appendix A to 49 CFR part 209.
Hazardous material means
‘‘hazardous material’’ as defined in 49
CFR 171.8.
Heavy rail transit means service
provided by self-propelled electric
railcars, typically drawing power from a
third rail, operating in separate rightsof-way in multiple cars; also referred to
as subways, metros or regional rail.
Host railroad means a railroad that
has effective control over a segment of
track.
Improvised explosive device (IED)
means a device fabricated in an
improvised manner that incorporates
explosives or destructive, lethal,
noxious, pyrotechnic, or incendiary
chemicals in its design, and generally
includes a power supply, a switch or
timer, and a detonator or initiator.
Intercity passenger train service
means both ‘‘train, long-distance
intercity passenger’’ and ‘‘train, shortdistance intercity passenger’’ as defined
in 49 CFR 238.5.
Light rail transit means service
provided by self-propelled electric
railcars, typically drawing power from
an overhead wire, operating in either
exclusive or non-exclusive rights-of-way
in single or multiple cars, with shorter
distance trips, and frequent stops; also
referred to as streetcars, trolleys, and
trams.
Motor vehicle means a vehicle,
machine, tractor, trailer, or semitrailer
propelled or drawn by mechanical
power and used upon the highways in
the transportation of passengers or
property, or any combination thereof,
but does not include any vehicle,
locomotive, or car operated exclusively
on a rail or rails, or a trolley bus
operated by electric power derived from
a fixed overhead wire, furnishing local
passenger transportation similar to
street-railway service.
Over-the-Road Bus (OTRB) means a
bus characterized by an elevated
passenger deck located over a baggage
compartment.
Owner/operator means any person
that owns, or maintains operational
control over, any transportation
infrastructure asset, facility, or system
regulated under this title, including
airport operator, aircraft operator,
foreign air carrier, indirect air carrier,
certified cargo screening facility, flight
school within the meaning of 49 CFR
1552.1(b), motor vehicle, public
transportation agency, or railroad
carrier. For purposes of a maritime
facility or a vessel, owner/operator has
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
16498
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
the same meaning as defined in 33 CFR
101.105.
Passenger rail car means rail rolling
equipment intended to provide
transportation for members of the
general public and includes a selfpropelled rail car designed to carry
passengers, baggage, mail, or express.
This term includes a rail passenger
coach, cab car, and a Multiple Unit
(MU) locomotive. In the context of
articulated equipment, ‘‘passenger rail
car’’ means that segment of the rail
rolling equipment located between two
trucks. This term does not include a
private rail car.
Passenger railroad carrier means a
railroad carrier that provides
transportation to persons (other than
employees, contractors, or persons
riding equipment to observe or monitor
railroad operations) by railroad in
intercity passenger service or commuter
or other short-haul passenger service in
a metropolitan or suburban area.
Passenger train means a train that
transports or is available to transport
members of the general public.
Person means an individual,
corporation, company, association, firm,
partnership, society, joint-stock
company, or governmental authority. It
includes a trustee, receiver, assignee,
successor, or similar representative of
any of them.
Private rail car means rail rolling
equipment that is used only for
excursion, recreational, or private
transportation purposes. A private rail
car is not a passenger rail car.
Public transportation means
transportation provided to the general
public by a regular and continuing
general or specific transportation
vehicle that is owned or operated by a
public transportation agency, including
providing one or more of the following
types of passenger transportation:
(1) Intercity or commuter passenger
train service or other short-haul railroad
passenger service in a metropolitan or
suburban area (as described by 49 U.S.C.
20102(1)).
(2) Heavy or light rail transit service,
whether on or off the general railroad
system of transportation.
(3) An automated guideway, cable car,
inclined plane, funicular, or monorail
system.
(4) Bus transit or commuter bus
service.
Public transportation agency means
any publicly-owned or operated
provider of regular and continuing
public transportation.
Rail hazardous materials receiver
means any owner/operator of a fixedsite facility that has a physical
connection to the general railroad
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
system of transportation and receives or
unloads from transportation in
commerce by rail one or more of the
categories and quantities of rail securitysensitive materials identified in 49 CFR
1580.3, but does not include the owner/
operator of a facility owned or operated
by a department, agency or
instrumentality of the Federal
Government.
Rail hazardous materials shipper
means the owner/operator of any fixedsite facility that has a physical
connection to the general railroad
system of transportation and offers (as
defined in the definition of ‘‘person who
offers or offeror’’ in 49 CFR 171.8),
prepares or loads for transportation by
rail one or more of the categories and
quantities of rail security-sensitive
materials as identified in 49 CFR 1580.3,
but does not include the owner/operator
of a facility owned or operated by a
department, agency or instrumentality
of the Federal Government.
Rail secure area means a secure
location(s) identified by a rail hazardous
materials shipper or rail hazardous
materials receiver where securityrelated pre-transportation or
transportation functions are performed
or rail cars containing the categories and
quantities of rail security-sensitive
materials are prepared, loaded, stored,
and/or unloaded.
Rail transit facility means rail transit
stations, terminals, and locations at
which rail transit infrastructure assets
are stored, command and control
operations are performed, or
maintenance is performed. The term
also includes rail yards, crew
management centers, dispatching
centers, transportation terminals and
stations, fueling centers, and
telecommunication centers.
Rail transit system or ‘‘Rail Fixed
Guideway System’’ means any light,
heavy, or rapid rail system, monorail,
inclined plane, funicular, cable car,
trolley, or automated guideway that
traditionally does not operate on track
that is part of the general railroad
system of transportation.
Railroad carrier means an owner/
operator providing railroad
transportation.
Railroad transportation means:
(1) Any form of non-highway ground
transportation that runs on rails or
electromagnetic guideways, including:
(i) Commuter or other short-haul rail
passenger service in a metropolitan or
suburban area; and
(ii) High speed ground transportation
systems that connect metropolitan areas,
without regard to whether these systems
use new technologies not associated
with traditional railroads.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(2) Such term includes rail transit
service operating on track that is part of
the general railroad system of
transportation but does not include
rapid transit operations in an urban area
that are not connected to the general
railroad system of transportation.
Record includes any means by which
information is preserved, irrespective of
format, including a book, paper,
drawing, map, recording, tape, film,
photograph, machine-readable material,
and any information stored in an
electronic format. The term record also
includes any draft, proposed, or
recommended change to any record.
Sensitive security information (SSI)
means information that is described in
and must be managed in accordance
with 49 CFR part 1520.
State means a State of the United
States and the District of Columbia.
Tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion
operation means a railroad or bus
operation that carries passengers, often
using antiquated equipment, with the
conveyance of the passengers to a
particular destination not being the
principal purpose. Train or bus
movements of new passenger equipment
for demonstration purposes are not
tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion
operations.
Transit means mass transportation by
a conveyance that provides regular and
continuing general or special
transportation to the public, but does
not include school bus, charter, or
sightseeing transportation. Rail transit
may occur on or off the general railroad
system of transportation.
Transportation or transport means the
movement of property including
loading, unloading, and storage.
Transportation or transport also
includes the movement of people,
boarding, and disembarking incident to
that movement.
Transportation facility means a
location at which transportation cargo,
equipment or infrastructure assets are
stored, equipment is transferred
between conveyances and/or modes of
transportation, transportation command
and control operations are performed, or
maintenance operations are performed.
The term also includes, but is not
limited to, passenger stations and
terminals (including any fixed facility at
which passengers are picked-up or
discharged), vehicle storage buildings or
yards, crew management centers,
dispatching centers, fueling centers, and
telecommunication centers.
Transportation security equipment
and systems means items, both
integrated into a system and standalone, used by owner/operators to
enhance capabilities to detect, deter,
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
prevent, or respond to a threat or
incident, including, but not limited to,
video surveillance, explosives detection,
radiological detection, intrusion
detection, motion detection, and
security screening.
Transportation Security Regulations
(TSR) means the regulations issued by
the Transportation Security
Administration, in title 49 of the Code
of Federal Regulations, chapter XII,
which includes parts 1500 through
1699.
Transportation Security-Sensitive
Material (TSSM) means hazardous
materials identified in 49 CFR
172.800(b).
TSA means the Transportation
Security Administration.
United States, in a geographical sense,
means the States of the United States,
the District of Columbia, and territories
and possessions of the United States,
including the territorial sea and the
overlying airspace.
Vulnerability assessment includes any
review, audit, or other examination of
the security of a transportation system,
infrastructure asset, or a transportationrelated automated system or network to
determine its vulnerability to unlawful
interference, whether during the
conception, planning, design,
construction, operation, or
decommissioning phase. A vulnerability
assessment includes the methodology
for the assessment, the results of the
assessment, and any proposed,
recommended, or directed actions or
countermeasures to address security
concerns.
PART 1503—INVESTIGATIVE AND
ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
3. The authority citation for part 1503
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 18 U.S.C. 6002; 28 U.S.C. 2461
(note); 49 U.S.C. 114, 20109, 31105, 40113–
40114, 40119, 44901–44907, 46101–46107,
46109–46110, 46301, 46305, 46311, 46313–
46314; Public Law 104–134 (110 Stat. 1321;
April 26, 1996), as amended by Pub. L. 114–
74 (129 Stat. 584; Nov. 2, 2015); and Pub. L.
110–53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) secs.
1408 (6 U.S.C. 1137), 1413 (6 U.S.C. 1142),
1501 (6 U.S.C. 1151), 1512 (6 U.S.C. 1162),
1517 (6 U.S.C. 1167), 1531 (6 U.S.C. 1181),
and 1534 (6 U.S.C. 1184).
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Subpart B—Scope of Investigative and
Enforcement Procedures
4. In § 1503.101 revise paragraphs
(b)(1) and (2) and add paragraph (b)(3)
to read as follows:
■
§ 1503.101
*
TSA requirements.
*
*
(b) * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
*
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
(1) Those provisions of title 49 U.S.C.
administered by the Administrator;
(2) 46 U.S.C. chapter 701; and
(3) Provisions of Public Law 110–53
(121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) not
codified in title 49 U.S.C. that are
administered by the Administrator.
Subchapter B—Security Rules for all
Modes of Transportation
PART 1520—PROTECTION OF
SENSITIVE SECURITY INFORMATION
5. The authority citation for part 1520
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 114, 40113, 44901–
44907, 44913–44914, 44916–44918, 44935–
44936, 44942, 46105, 70102–70106, 70117;
Pub. L. 110–53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007)
secs. 1408 (6 U.S.C. 1137), 1413 (6 U.S.C.
1142), 1501 (6 U.S.C. 1151), 1512 (6 U.S.C.
1162), 1517 (6 U.S.C. 1167), 1531 (6 U.S.C.
1181), and 1534 (6 U.S.C. 1184).
§ 1520.3
[Amended]
6. In § 1520.3, remove the definitions
of ‘‘DHS, ‘‘DOT’’, ‘‘Rail facility’’, ‘‘Rail
hazardous materials receiver’’, ‘‘Rail
hazardous materials shipper, ‘‘Rail
transit facility’’, ‘‘Rail transit system or
Rail Fixed Guideway System’’,
‘‘Railroad’’, ‘‘Record’’, and
‘‘Vulnerability assessment’’.
■ 7. In § 1520.5, revise paragraphs (b)(1),
(b)(6)(i), (b)(8) introductory text, (b)(10),
(b)(12) introductory text, and (b)(15) to
read as follows:
■
§ 1520.5
Sensitive security information.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) Security programs, security plans,
and contingency plans. Any security
program, security plan, or security
contingency plan issued, established,
required, received, or approved by DHS
or DOT, including any comments,
instructions, or implementing guidance,
including—
(i) Any aircraft operator, airport
operator, fixed base operator, or air
cargo security program, or security
contingency plan under this chapter;
(ii) Any vessel, maritime facility, or
port area security plan required or
directed under Federal law;
(iii) Any national or area security plan
prepared under 46 U.S.C. 70103;
(iv) Any security incident response
plan established under 46 U.S.C. 70104,
and
(v) Any security program or plan
required under subchapter D of this
title.
*
*
*
*
*
(6) * * *
(i) Details of any aviation, maritime,
or surface transportation inspection, or
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16499
any investigation or an alleged violation
of aviation, maritime, or surface
transportation security requirements of
Federal law, that could reveal a security
vulnerability, including the identity of
the Federal special agent or other
Federal employee who conducted the
inspection or investigation, and
including any recommendations
concerning the inspection or
investigation.
*
*
*
*
*
(8) Security measures. Specific details
of aviation, maritime, or surface
transportation security measures, both
operational and technical, whether
applied directly by the Federal
government or another person,
including the following:
*
*
*
*
*
(10) Security training materials.
Records created or obtained for the
purpose of training persons employed
by, contracted with, or acting for the
Federal government or another person
to carry out aviation, maritime, or
surface transportation security measures
required or recommended by DHS or
DOT.
*
*
*
*
*
(12) Critical transportation
infrastructure asset information. Any
list identifying systems or assets,
whether physical or virtual, so vital to
the aviation, maritime, or surface
transportation that the incapacity or
destruction of such assets would have a
debilitating impact on transportation
security, if the list is—
*
*
*
*
*
(15) Research and development.
Information obtained or developed in
the conduct of research related to
aviation, maritime, or surface
transportation, where such research is
approved, accepted, funded,
recommended, or directed by DHS or
DOT, including research results.
*
*
*
*
*
8. In § 1520.7, revise paragraph (n) to
read as follows:
■
§ 1520.7
Covered persons.
*
*
*
*
*
(n) Each owner/operator of maritime
or surface transportation subject to the
requirements of subchapter D of this
chapter.
9. Revise the heading for subchapter D
to read as follows:
■
Subchapter D—Maritime and Surface
Transportation Security
10. Revise part 1570 to read as
follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16500
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
PART 1570—GENERAL RULES
Subpart A—General
Sec.
1570.1 Scope.
1570.3 Terms used in this subchapter.
1570.5 Fraud and intentional falsification of
records.
1570.7 Security responsibilities of
employees and other persons.
1570.9 Compliance, inspection, and
enforcement.
Subpart B—Security Programs
1570.101 Scope.
1570.103 Content.
1570.105 Responsibility for Determinations.
1570.107 Recognition of prior or
established security measures or
programs.
1570.109 Submission and approval.
1570.111 Implementation schedules.
1570.113 Amendments requested by owner/
operator.
1570.115 Amendments required by TSA.
1570.117 Alternative measures.
1570.119 Petitions for reconsideration.
1570.121 Recordkeeping and availability.
Subpart C—Operations
1570.201 Security Coordinator.
1570.203 Reporting significant security
concerns.
Subpart D—Security Threat Assessments
1570.301 Fraudulent use or manufacture;
responsibilities of persons.
1570.303 Inspection of credential.
1570.305 False statements regarding
security background checks by public
transportation agency or railroad carrier.
Appendix A to Part 1570—Reporting of
Significant Security Concerns
Authority: 18 U.S.C. 842, 845; 46 U.S.C.
70105; 49 U.S.C. 114, 5103a, 40113, and
46105; Pub. L. 108–90 (117 Stat. 1156, Oct.
1, 2003), sec. 520 (6 U.S.C. 469), as amended
by Pub. L. 110–329 (122 Stat. 3689, Sept. 30,
2008) sec. 543 (6 U.S.C. 469); Pub. L. 110–
53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) secs. 1402
(6 U.S.C. 1131), 1405 (6 U.S.C. 1134), 1408
(6 U.S.C. 1137), 1413 (6 U.S.C. 1142), 1414
(6 U.S.C. 1143), 1501 (6 U.S.C. 1151), 1512
(6 U.S.C. 1162), 1517 (6 U.S.C. 1167), 1522
(6 U.S.C. 1170), 1531 (6 U.S.C. 1181), and
1534 (6 U.S.C. 1184).
Subpart A—General
§ 1570.1
Scope.
This part applies to any person
involved in maritime or surface
transportation as specified in this
subchapter.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
§ 1570.3
Terms used in this subchapter.
In addition to the definitions in
§§ 1500.3, 1500.5, and 1503.202 of
subchapter A, the following terms are
used in this subchapter:
Adjudicate means to make an
administrative determination of whether
an applicant meets the standards in this
subchapter, based on the merits of the
issues raised.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
Alien means any person not a citizen
or national of the United States.
Alien registration number means the
number issued by the DHS to an
individual when he or she becomes a
lawful permanent resident of the United
States or attains other lawful, noncitizen status.
Applicant means a person who has
applied for one of the security threat
assessments identified in this
subchapter.
Commercial driver’s license (CDL) is
used as defined in 49 CFR 383.5.
Contractor means a person or
organization that provides a service for
an owner/operator regulated under this
subchapter consistent with a specific
understanding or arrangement. The
understanding can be a written contract
or an informal arrangement that reflects
an ongoing relationship between the
parties.
Convicted means any plea of guilty or
nolo contendere, or any finding of guilt,
except when the finding of guilt is
subsequently overturned on appeal,
pardoned, or expunged. For purposes of
this subchapter, a conviction is
expunged when the conviction is
removed from the individual’s criminal
history record and there are no legal
disabilities or restrictions associated
with the expunged conviction, other
than the fact that the conviction may be
used for sentencing purposes for
subsequent convictions. In addition,
where an individual is allowed to
withdraw an original plea of guilty or
nolo contendere and enter a plea of not
guilty and the case is subsequently
dismissed, the individual is no longer
considered to have a conviction for
purposes of this subchapter.
Determination of No Security Threat
means an administrative determination
by TSA that an individual does not pose
a security threat warranting denial of an
HME or a TWIC.
Employee means an individual who is
engaged or compensated by an owner/
operator regulated under this
subchapter, or by a contractor to an
owner/operator regulated under this
subchapter. The term includes direct
employees, contractor employees,
authorized representatives, immediate
supervisors, and individuals who are
self-employed.
Federal Maritime Security
Coordinator (FMSC) has the same
meaning as defined in 46 U.S.C.
70103(a)(2)(G); is the Captain of the Port
(COTP) exercising authority for the
COTP zones described in 33 CFR part 3,
and is the Port Facility Security Officer
as described in the International Ship
and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code,
part A.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Final Determination of Threat
Assessment means a final
administrative determination by TSA,
including the resolution of related
appeals, that an individual poses a
security threat warranting denial of an
HME or a TWIC.
Hazardous materials endorsement
(HME) means the authorization for an
individual to transport hazardous
materials in commerce, an indication of
which must be on the individual’s
commercial driver’s license, as provided
in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration regulations in 49 CFR
part 383.
Immediate supervisor means a
manager, supervisor, or agent of the
owner/operator to the extent the
individual:
(1) Performs the work of a securitysensitive employee; or
(2) Supervises and otherwise directs
the performance of a security-sensitive
employee.
Imprisoned or imprisonment means
confined to a prison, jail, or institution
for the criminally insane, on a full-time
basis, pursuant to a sentence imposed as
the result of a criminal conviction or
finding of not guilty by reason of
insanity. Time spent confined or
restricted to a half-way house, treatment
facility, or similar institution, pursuant
to a sentence imposed as the result of a
criminal conviction or finding of not
guilty by reason of insanity, does not
constitute imprisonment for purposes of
this rule.
Incarceration means confined or
otherwise restricted to a jail-type
institution, half-way house, treatment
facility, or another institution on a full
or part-time basis, pursuant to a
sentence imposed as the result of a
criminal conviction or finding of not
guilty by reason of insanity.
Initial Determination of Threat
Assessment means an initial
administrative determination by TSA
that an applicant poses a security threat
warranting denial of an HME or a TWIC.
Initial Determination of Threat
Assessment and Immediate Revocation
means an initial administrative
determination that an individual poses
a security threat that warrants
immediate revocation of an HME or
invalidation of a TWIC. In the case of an
HME, the State must immediately
revoke the HME if TSA issues an Initial
Determination of Threat Assessment
and Immediate Revocation. In the case
of a TWIC, TSA invalidates the TWIC
when TSA issues an Initial
Determination of Threat Assessment
and Immediate Revocation.
Invalidate means the action TSA takes
to make a credential inoperative when
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
it is reported as lost, stolen, damaged,
no longer needed, or when TSA
determines an applicant does not meet
the security threat assessment standards
of 49 CFR part 1572.
Lawful permanent resident means an
alien lawfully admitted for permanent
residence, as defined in 8 U.S.C.
1101(a)(20).
Maritime facility has the same
meaning as ‘‘facility’’ together with
‘‘OCS facility’’ (Outer Continental Shelf
facility), as defined in 33 CFR 101.105.
Mental health facility means a mental
institution, mental hospital, sanitarium,
psychiatric facility, and any other
facility that provides diagnoses by
licensed professionals of mental
retardation or mental illness, including
a psychiatric ward in a general hospital.
National of the United States means
a citizen of the United States, or a
person who, though not a citizen, owes
permanent allegiance to the United
States, as defined in 8 U.S.C.
1101(a)(22), and includes American
Samoa and Swains Island.
Revocation means the termination,
deactivation, rescission, invalidation,
cancellation, or withdrawal of the
privileges and duties conferred by an
HME or TWIC, when TSA determines
an applicant does not meet the security
threat assessment standards of 49 CFR
part 1572.
Secure area means the area on board
a vessel or at a facility or outer
continental shelf facility, over which the
owner/operator has implemented
security measures for access control, as
defined by a Coast Guard approved
security plan. It does not include
passenger access areas or public access
areas, as these terms are defined in 33
CFR 104.106 and 105.106 respectively.
Vessels operating under the waivers
provided for at 46 U.S.C. 8103(b)(3)(A)
or (B) have no secure areas. Facilities
subject to 33 CFR chapter I, subchapter
H, part 105 may, with approval of the
Coast Guard, designate only those
portions of their facility that are directly
connected to maritime transportation or
are at risk of being involved in a
transportation security incident as their
secure areas.
Security-sensitive employee, for
purposes of this part, means ‘‘security
sensitive employee’’ as defined in
§ 1580.3, § 1582.3, or § 1584.3 of this
title.
Security-sensitive job function, for
purposes of this part, means a job
function identified in appendix B to
part 1580, appendix B to part 1582, and
appendix B to part 1584 of this title.
Security threat means an individual
whom TSA determines or suspects of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
posing a threat to national security; to
transportation security; or of terrorism.
Transportation Worker Identification
Credential (TWIC) means a Federal
biometric credential, issued to an
individual, when TSA determines that
the individual does not pose a security
threat.
Withdrawal of Initial Determination of
Threat Assessment is the document that
TSA issues after issuing an Initial
Determination of Security Threat, when
TSA determines that an individual does
not pose a security threat that warrants
denial of an HME or TWIC.
§ 1570.5 Fraud and intentional falsification
of records.
No person may make, cause to be
made, attempt, or cause to attempt any
of the following:
(a) Any fraudulent or intentionally
false statement in any record or report
that is kept, made, or used to show
compliance with the subchapter, or
exercise any privileges under this
subchapter.
(b) Any reproduction or alteration, for
fraudulent purpose, of any record,
report, security program, access
medium, or identification medium
issued under this subchapter or
pursuant to standards in this
subchapter.
§ 1570.7 Security responsibilities of
employees and other persons.
(a) No person may—
(1) Tamper or interfere with,
compromise, modify, attempt to
circumvent, or cause another person to
tamper or interfere with, compromise,
modify, or attempt to circumvent any
security measure implemented under
this subchapter.
(2) Enter, or be present within, a
secured or restricted area without
complying with the security measures
applied as required under this
subchapter to control access to, or
presence or movement in, such areas.
(3) Use, allow to be used, or cause to
be used, any approved access medium
or identification medium that authorizes
the access, presence, or movement of
persons or vehicles in secured or
restricted areas in any other manner
than that for which it was issued by the
appropriate authority to meet the
requirements of this subchapter.
(b) The provisions of paragraph (a) of
this section do not apply to conducting
inspections or tests to determine
compliance with this subchapter
authorized by—
(1) TSA and DHS officials working
with TSA; or
(2) The owner/operator when acting
in accordance with the procedures
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16501
described in a security plan and/or
program approved by TSA.
§ 1570.9 Compliance, inspection, and
enforcement.
(a) Each person subject to any of the
requirements of this subchapter, must
allow TSA and other authorized DHS
officials, at any time and in a reasonable
manner, without advance notice, to
enter, assess, inspect, and test property,
facilities, equipment, and operations;
and to view, inspect, and copy records,
as necessary to carry out TSA’s securityrelated statutory or regulatory
authorities, including its authority to—
(1) Assess threats to transportation.
(2) Enforce security-related laws,
regulations, directives, and
requirements.
(3) Inspect, maintain, and test the
security of facilities, equipment, and
systems.
(4) Ensure the adequacy of security
measures for the transportation of
passengers and cargo.
(5) Oversee the implementation, and
ensure the adequacy, of security
measures for the owner/operator’s
conveyances and vehicles, at
transportation facilities and
infrastructure and other assets related to
transportation.
(6) Review security plans and/or
programs.
(7) Determine compliance with any
requirements in this chapter.
(8) Carry out such other duties, and
exercise such other powers, relating to
transportation security, as the
Administrator for TSA considers
appropriate, to the extent authorized by
law.
(b) At the request of TSA, each owner/
operator subject to the requirements of
this subchapter must provide evidence
of compliance with this chapter,
including copies of records.
(c) TSA and other authorized DHS
officials, may enter, without advance
notice, and be present within any area
or within any vehicle or conveyance,
terminal, or other facility covered by
this chapter without access media or
identification media issued or approved
by an owner/operator covered by this
chapter in order to inspect or test
compliance, or perform other such
duties as TSA may direct.
(d) TSA inspectors and other
authorized DHS officials working with
TSA will, on request, present their
credentials for examination, but the
credentials may not be photocopied or
otherwise reproduced.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16502
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
The requirements of this subpart
address general security program
requirements applicable to each owner/
operator required to have a security
program under subpart B to 49 CFR
parts 1580, 1582, and 1584.
requirements of § 1580.115, § 1582.115,
or § 1584.115 of this subchapter as it
relates to the function of the individual
security-sensitive employee and the
training was provided within the
schedule required for recurrent training.
(b) Retains a record of such training
in compliance with the requirements of
§ 1570.121 of this part.
§ 1570.103
§ 1570.109
Subpart B—Security Programs
§ 1570.101
Scope.
Content.
(a) Security program. Except as
otherwise approved by TSA, each
owner/operator required to have a
security program must address each of
the security program requirements
identified in subpart B to 49 CFR parts
1580, 1582, and 1584.
(b) Use of appendices. The owner/
operator may comply with the
requirements referenced in paragraph
(a) of this section by including in its
security program, as an appendix, any
document that contains the information
required by the applicable subpart B,
including procedures, protocols or
memorandums of understanding related
to external agency response to security
incidents or events. The appendix must
be referenced in the corresponding
section(s) of the security program.
§ 1570.105 Responsibility for
Determinations.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
(a) Higher-risk operations. While TSA
has determined the criteria for
applicability of the requirements in
subpart B to 49 CFR parts 1580, 1582,
and 1584 based on risk-assessments for
freight railroad, public transportation
system, passenger railroad, or over-theroad (OTRB) owner/operators are
required to determine if the
applicability criteria identified in
subpart B to parts 1580, 1582, and 1584
apply to their operations. Owner/
operators are required to notify TSA of
applicability within 30 days of June 22,
2020.
(b) New or modified operations. If an
owner/operator commences new
operations or modifies existing
operations after June 22, 2020, that
person is responsible for determining
whether the new or modified operations
would meet the applicability criteria in
subpart B to 49 CFR part 1580, 1582, or
1584 and must notify TSA no later than
90 calendar days before commencing
operations or implementing
modifications.
§ 1570.107 Recognition of prior or
established security measures or programs.
Previously provided security training
may be credited towards satisfying the
requirements of this subchapter
provided the owner/operator—
(a) Obtains a complete record of such
training and validates the training meets
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
Submission and approval.
(a) Submission of security program.
Each owner/operator required under
parts 1580, 1582, or 1584 of this
subchapter to adopt and carry out a
security program must submit it to TSA
for approval in a form and manner
prescribed by TSA.
(b) Security training deadlines. Except
as otherwise directed by TSA, each
owner/operator required under subpart
B to part 1580, 1582, or 1584 of this
subchapter to develop a security
training program must—
(1) Submit its program to TSA for
approval no later than 90 calendar days
after June 22, 2020.
(2) If commencing or modifying
operations so as to be subject to the
requirements of subpart B to 49 CFR
part 1580, 1582, or 1584 after June 22,
2020, submit a training program to TSA
no later than 90 calendar days before
commencing new or modified
operations.
(c) TSA approval. (1) No later than 60
calendar days after receiving the
proposed security program required by
subpart B to 49 CFR parts 1580, 1582,
and 1584, TSA will either approve the
program or provide the owner/operator
with written notice to modify the
program to comply with the applicable
requirements of this subchapter. TSA
will notify the owner/operator if it
needs an extension of time to approve
the program or provide the owner/
operator with written notice to modify
the program to comply with the
applicable requirements of this
subchapter.
(2) Notice to modify. If TSA provides
the owner/operator with written notice
to modify the security program to
comply with the applicable
requirements of this subchapter, the
owner/operator must provide a
modified security program to TSA for
approval within the timeframe specified
by TSA.
(3) TSA may request additional
information, and the owner/operator
must provide the information within the
time period TSA prescribes. The 60-day
period for TSA approval or modification
will begin when the owner/operator
provides the additional information.
(g) Petition for reconsideration.
Within 30 days of receiving the notice
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
to modify, the owner/operator may file
a petition for reconsideration under
§ 1570.119 of this part.
§ 1570.111
Implementation schedules.
(a) Initial security training. Each
owner/operator required under parts
1580, 1582, or 1584 of this subchapter
to adopt and carry out a security
program must provide initial security
training to security-sensitive employees,
using the curriculum approved by
TSA—
(1) No later than one year after the
date of TSA-approval of the owner/
operator’s security training program if
the employee is employed to perform a
security-sensitive function on the date
TSA approves the program.
(2) No later than 60 calendar days
after the employee first performs a
security-sensitive job function if
performance of a security-sensitive job
function is initiated after TSA approves
the security training program.
(3) No later than the 60th calendar
day of employment performing a
security-sensitive function, aggregated
over a consecutive 12-month period, if
the security-sensitive job function is
performed intermittently.
(b) Recurrent security training. (1)
Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2)
of this section, a security-sensitive
employee required to receive training
under part 1580, 1582, or 1584 of this
subchapter must receive the required
training at least once every three years.
(2) If an owner/operator modifies a
security program or security plan for
which training is required under
§ 1580.203(b), § 1582.115(b), or
§ 1584.115(b) of this subchapter, the
owner/operator must ensure each
security-sensitive employee with
position- or function-specific
responsibilities related to the revised
plan or program changes receives
training on the revisions within 90 days
of implementation of the revised plan or
program changes. All other employees
must receive training that reflects the
changes to the operating security
requirements as part of their regularly
scheduled recurrent training.
(3) The three-year recurrent training
cycle is based on the anniversary
calendar month of the employee’s initial
security training. If the owner/operator
provides the recurrent security training
in the month of, the month before, or
the month after it is due, the employee
is considered to have taken the training
in the month it is due.
(c) Extensions of time. TSA may grant
an extension of time for implementing
a security program identified in subpart
B to parts 1580, 1582, and 1584 of this
subchapter upon a showing of good
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
cause. The owner/operator must request
the extension of time in writing and
TSA must receive the request within a
reasonable time before the due date to
be extended; an owner/operator may
request an extension after the expiration
of a due date by sending a written
request describing why the failure to
meet the due date was excusable. TSA
will respond to the request in writing.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
§ 1570.113 Amendments requested by
owner/operator.
(a) Changes to ownership or control of
operations. Each owner/operator
required under part 1580, 1582, or 1584
of this subchapter to adopt and carry out
a security program must submit a
request to amend its security program if,
after approval, there are any changes to
the ownership or control of the
operation.
(b) Changes to conditions affecting
security. Each owner/operator required
under part 1580, 1582, or 1584 of this
subchapter to adopt and carry out a
security program must submit a request
to amend its security program if, after
approval, the owner/operator makes, or
intends to make, permanent changes to
any of the following procedures,
measures, or other aspects of security or
emergency response planning
implemented by the owner/operator to
address:
(1) Specific procedures implemented
or used to prevent and detect
unauthorized access to restricted areas
designated by the owner/operator;
(2) Measures to be implemented in
response to a period of heightened
security risk, communicated through a
DHS enhanced security notification,
including the process used to notify all
employees of changes in alert level
status or requirements to implement
specific elements of the security plan
and verify that appropriate enhanced
security measures have been
implemented at all relevant locations.
(3) Emergency response plans,
including:
(i) Coordinated response plans
establishing procedures for appropriate
interaction with State, local, and tribal
law enforcement agencies, emergency
responders, and Federal officials in
order to coordinate security measures
and plans for response in the event of
a terrorist threat, attack, or other
transportation security-related incident;
(ii) Specific procedures to be
implemented or used by the owner/
operator in response to a terrorist attack,
including evacuation and
communication plans that include
individuals with disabilities; and
(iii) Additional measures to be
adopted to address weaknesses in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
emergency response procedures
identified during regular drills or
exercises that test corporate capabilities
to direct, coordinate, and execute
prevention and response activities for
terrorist attacks or other security threats,
including tunnel evacuation procedures,
if applicable.
(iv) Redundant and backup systems to
ensure the continuity of operations of
critical assets and infrastructure system
in the event of a terrorist attack or other
transportation security-related incident.
(c) Changes to security training
curriculum. Each owner/operator
required under part 1580, 1582, or 1584
of this subchapter to adopt and carry out
a security program must submit a
request to amend its security program if,
after approval, the owner/operator
makes, or intends to make, permanent
changes to its security training
curriculum required under part 1580,
1582, or 1584, including changes to
address:
(1) Determinations that the security
training program is ineffective based on
the approved method for evaluating
effectiveness in the security training
program approved by TSA under
subpart B of parts 1580, 1582, and 1584;
or
(2) Development of recurrent training
material for purposes of meeting the
requirements in § 1570.111(b) of this
part or other alternative training
materials not previously approved by
TSA.
(d) Permanent change. For purposes
of this section, a ‘‘permanent change’’ is
one intended to be in effect for 60 or
more calendar days.
(e) Schedule for requesting
amendment. The owner/operator must
file the request for an amendment with
TSA no later than 65 calendar days after
the change in subsection (b) takes effect,
unless TSA allows a shorter time
period.
(f) TSA approval. (1) Within 30
calendar days after receiving a proposed
amendment, TSA will, in writing, either
approve or deny the request to amend.
TSA will notify the owner/operator if it
needs an extension of time to consider
the proposed amendment.
(2) TSA may approve—
(i) An amendment to a security
program if TSA determines that it is in
the interest of the public and
transportation security and the
proposed amendment provides the level
of security required under this
subchapter.
(ii) Modification to security training
curriculum, including alternative
training for purposes of meeting the
recurrent training requirement, if all the
required training elements are
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
16503
addressed and the material is consistent
with the most recent iteration of the
security program submitted to, and
approved by, TSA (including
amendments made to reflect relevant
changes to operations and/or security
measures and response plans).
(iii) TSA may request additional
information from the owner/operator
before rendering a decision.
(g) Petition for reconsideration. No
later than 30 calendar days after
receiving a denial, the owner/operator
may file a petition for reconsideration
under § 1570.119 of this part.
§ 1570.115
Amendments required by TSA.
(a) Notification of requirement to
amend. TSA may require amendments
to a security program in the interest of
the public and transportation security,
including any new information about
emerging threats, or methods for
addressing emerging threats, as follows:
(1) TSA will notify the owner/
operator of the proposed amendment,
fixing a period of not less than 30
calendar days within which the owner/
operator may submit written
information, views, and arguments on
the amendment.
(2) After TSA considers all relevant
material received, TSA will notify the
owner/operator of any amendment
adopted or rescind the notice.
(b) Effective date of amendment. If
TSA adopts the amendment, it becomes
effective not less than 30 calendar days
after the owner/operator receives the
notice of amendment, unless the owner/
operator disagrees with the proposed
amendment and files a petition for
reconsideration under § 1570.119 of this
part no later than 15 calendar days
before the effective date of the
amendment. A timely petition for
reconsideration stays the effective date
of the amendment.
(c) Emergency amendments. If TSA
determines that there is an emergency
requiring immediate action in the
interest of the public or transportation
security, TSA may issue an amendment,
without the prior notice and comment
procedures in paragraph (a) of this
section, effective without stay on the
date the covered owner/operator
receives notice of it. In such a case, TSA
will incorporate in the notice a brief
statement of the reasons and findings for
the amendment to be adopted. The
owner/operator may file a petition for
reconsideration under § 1570.119 of this
part; however, this does not stay the
effective date of the emergency
amendment.
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16504
§ 1570.117
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Alternative measures.
(a) If in TSA’s judgment, the overall
security of transportation provided by
an owner/operator subject to the
requirements of 49 CFR part 1580, 1582,
or 1584 are not diminished, TSA may
approve alternative measures.
(b) Each owner/operator requesting
alternative measures must file the
request for approval in a form and
manner prescribed by TSA. The filing of
such a request does not affect the
owner/operator’s responsibility for
compliance while the request is being
considered.
(c) TSA may request additional
information, and the owner/operator
must provide the information within the
time period TSA prescribes. Within 30
calendar days after receiving a request
for alternative measures and all
requested information, TSA will, in
writing, either approve or deny the
request.
(d) If TSA finds that the use of the
alternative measures is in the interest of
the public and transportation security, it
may grant the request subject to any
conditions TSA deems necessary. In
considering the request for alternative
measures, TSA will review all relevant
factors including—
(1) The risks associated with the type
of operation, for example, whether the
owner/operator transports hazardous
materials or passengers within a high
threat urban area, whether the owner/
operator transports passengers and the
volume of passengers transported, or
whether the owner/operator hosts a
passenger operation.
(2) Any relevant threat information.
(3) Other circumstances concerning
potential risk to the public and
transportation security.
(e) No later than 30 calendar days
after receiving a denial, the owner/
operator may petition for
reconsideration under § 1570.119 of this
part.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
§ 1570.119
Petitions for reconsideration.
(a) If an owner/operator seeks to
petition for reconsideration of a
determination, required modification,
denial of a request for amendment by
the owner/operator, denial to rescind a
TSA-required amendment, or denial of
an alternative measure, the owner/
operator must submit a written petition
for reconsideration that includes a
statement and any supporting
documentation explaining why the
owner/operator believes TSA’s decision
is incorrect.
(b) Upon review of the petition for
reconsideration, the Administrator or
designee will dispose of the petition by
affirming, modifying, or rescinding its
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
previous decision. This is considered a
final agency action.
§ 1570.121
Recordkeeping and availability.
(a) Retention. Each owner/operator
required to have a security program
under subpart B to parts 1580, 1582, and
1584 of this subchapter must—
(1) Retain security training records for
each individual required to receive
security training under §§ 1580.115,
1582.115, and 1584.115 that, at a
minimum—
(i) Includes employee’s full name, job
title or function, date of hire, and date
of initial and recurrent security training;
and
(ii) Identifies the date, course name,
course length, and list of topics
addressed for the security training most
recently provided in each of the areas
required under §§ 1580.115, 1582.115,
and 1584.115 of this subchapter.
(2) Retain records of initial and
recurrent security training for no less
than five (5) years from the date of
training.
(3) Provide records to current and
former employees upon request and at
no charge as necessary to provide proof
of training.
(b) Electronic records. Each owner/
operator required to retain records
under this section may keep them in
electronic form. An owner/operator may
maintain and transfer records through
electronic transmission, storage, and
retrieval provided that the electronic
system provides for the maintenance of
records as originally submitted without
corruption, loss of data, or tampering.
(c) Protection of SSI. Each owner/
operator must restrict the distribution,
disclosure, and availability of security
sensitive information, as identified in
part 1520 of this chapter, to persons
with a need to know. The owner/
operator must refer requests for such
information by other persons to TSA.
(d) Availability. Each owner/operator
must make the records available to TSA
upon request for inspection and
copying.
Subpart C—Operations
§ 1570.201
Security Coordinator.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs
(b) and (c) of this section, each owner/
operator identified in §§ 1580.1, 1582.1,
and 1584.101 of this subchapter must
designate and use a primary and at least
one alternate Security Coordinator.
(b) An owner/operator identified in
§ 1582.1(a)(2) of this subchapter (public
transportation agency) that owns or
operates a bus-only operation must
designate and use a primary and at least
one alternate Security Coordinator only
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
if the owner/operator is identified in
appendix A to part 1582 of this
subchapter or is notified by TSA in
writing that a threat exists concerning
that operation.
(c) An owner/operator identified in
§ 1580.1(a)(5) or § 1582.1(a)(4) of this
subchapter (private rail car, tourist,
scenic, historic, or excursion rail
operations) must designate and use a
primary and at least one alternate
Security Coordinator, only if notified by
TSA in writing that a threat exists
concerning that type of operation.
(d) The Security Coordinator and
alternate(s) must be appointed at the
corporate level.
(e) Each owner/operator required to
have a Security Coordinator must
provide in writing to TSA the names,
U.S. citizenship status, titles, phone
number(s), and email address(es) of the
Security Coordinator and alternate
Security Coordinator(s) within 37
calendar days of the effective date of
this rule, commencement of operations,
or change in any of the information
required by this section.
(f) Each owner/operator required to
have a Security Coordinator must
ensure that at least one Security
Coordinator—
(1) Serves as the primary contact for
intelligence information and securityrelated activities and communications
with TSA. Any individual designated as
a Security Coordinator may perform
other duties in addition to the duties
described in this section.
(2) Is accessible to TSA on a 24 hours
a day, 7 days a week basis.
(3) Coordinates security practices and
procedures internally and with
appropriate law enforcement and
emergency response agencies.
§ 1570.203
concerns.
Reporting significant security
(a) Each owner/operator identified in
§§ 1580.1, 1582.1, and 1584.101 of this
subchapter must report, within 24 hours
of initial discovery, any potential threats
and significant security concerns
involving transportation-related
operations in the United States or
transportation to, from, or within the
United States as soon as possible by the
methods prescribed by TSA.
(b) Potential threats or significant
security concerns encompass incidents,
suspicious activities, and threat
information including, but not limited
to, the categories of reportable events
listed in appendix A to this part.
(c) Information reported must include
the following, as available and
applicable:
(1) The name of the reporting
individual and contact information,
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
including a telephone number or email
address.
(2) The affected freight or passenger
train, transit vehicle, motor vehicle,
station, terminal, rail hazardous
materials facility, or other facility or
infrastructure, including identifying
information and current location.
(3) Scheduled origination and
termination locations for the affected
freight or passenger train, transit
vehicle, or motor vehicle–including
departure and destination city and
route.
(4) Description of the threat, incident,
or activity, including who has been
notified and what action has been taken.
(5) The names, other available
biographical data, and/or descriptions
(including vehicle or license plate
information) of individuals or motor
vehicles known or suspected to be
involved in the threat, incident, or
activity.
(6) The source of any threat
information.
Subpart D—Security Threat
Assessments
§ 1570.303
Inspection of credential.
(a) Each person who has been issued
or possesses a TWIC must present the
TWIC for inspection upon a request
from TSA, the Coast Guard, or other
authorized DHS representative; an
authorized representative of the
National Transportation Safety Board; or
a Federal, State, or local law
enforcement officer.
(b) Each person who has been issued
or who possesses a TWIC must allow his
or her TWIC to be read by a reader and
must submit his or her reference
biometric, such as a fingerprint, and any
other required information, such as a
PIN, to the reader, upon a request from
TSA, the Coast Guard, other authorized
DHS representative; or a Federal, State,
or local law enforcement officer.
§ 1570.301 Fraudulent use or manufacture;
responsibilities of persons.
§ 1570.305 False statements regarding
security background checks by public
transportation agency or railroad carrier.
(a) No person may use or attempt to
use a credential, security threat
assessment, access control medium, or
identification medium issued or
conducted under this subchapter that
was issued or conducted for another
person.
(b) No person may make, produce, use
or attempt to use a false or fraudulently
created access control medium,
identification medium or security threat
assessment issued or conducted under
this subchapter.
(c) No person may tamper or interfere
with, compromise, modify, attempt to
(a) Scope. This section implements
sections 1414(e) (6 U.S.C. 1143) and
1522(e) (6 U.S.C. 1170) of the
‘‘Implementing Recommendations of the
9/11 Commission Act of 2007,’’ Public
Law 110–53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3,
2007).
(b) Definitions. In addition to the
terms in §§ 1500.3, 1500.5, and
1503.202 of subchapter A and § 1570.3
of subchapter D of this chapter, the
following term applies to this part:
Security background check means
reviewing the following for the purpose
of identifying individuals who may pose
a threat to transportation security,
national security, or of terrorism:
(i) Relevant criminal history
databases.
(ii) In the case of an alien (as defined
in sec. 101 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(3)), the
relevant databases to determine the
status of the alien under the
immigration laws of the United States.
(iii) Other relevant information or
databases, as determined by the
Secretary of Homeland Security.
(c) Prohibitions. (1) A public
transportation agency or a contractor or
subcontractor of a public transportation
agency may not knowingly misrepresent
to an employee or other relevant person,
including an arbiter involved in a labor
arbitration, the scope, application, or
meaning of any rules, regulations,
directives, or guidance issued by the
Secretary of Homeland Security related
to security background check
requirements for employees when
conducting a security background
check.
(2) A railroad carrier or a contractor
or subcontractor of a railroad carrier
may not knowingly misrepresent to an
employee or other relevant person,
including an arbiter involved in a labor
arbitration, the scope, application, or
meaning of any rules, regulations,
directives, or guidance issued by the
Secretary of Homeland Security related
to security background check
requirements for employees when
conducting a security background
check.
Appendix A to Part 1570—Reporting of
Significant Security Concerns
Category
Description
Breach, Attempted Intrusion, and/or Interference
Unauthorized personnel attempting to or actually entering a restricted area or secure site relating to a transportation facility or conveyance owned, operated, or used by an owner/operator
subject to this part. This includes individuals entering or attempting to enter by impersonation of authorized personnel (for example, police/security, janitor, vehicle owner/operator).
Activity that could interfere with the ability of employees to perform duties to the extent that
security is threatened.
Presenting false, or misusing, insignia, documents, and/or identification, to misrepresent one’s
affiliation with an owner/operator subject to this part to cover possible illicit activity that may
pose a risk to transportation security.
Stealing or diverting identification media or badges, uniforms, vehicles, keys, tools capable of
compromising track integrity, portable derails, technology, or classified or sensitive security
information documents which are proprietary to the facility or conveyance owned, operated,
or used by an owner/operator subject to this part.
Damaging, manipulating, or defeating safety and security appliances in connection with a facility, infrastructure, conveyance, or routing mechanism, resulting in the compromised use or
the temporary or permanent loss of use of the facility, infrastructure, conveyance or routing
mechanism. Placing or attaching a foreign object to a rail car(s).
Compromising, or attempting to compromise or disrupt the information/technology infrastructure of an owner/operator subject to this part.
Communicating a spoken or written threat to damage or compromise a facility/infrastructure/
conveyance owned, operated, or used by an owner/operator subject to this part (for example, a bomb threat or active shooter).
Misrepresentation ...............................................
Theft, Loss, and/or Diversion .............................
Sabotage, Tampering, and/or Vandalism ...........
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
circumvent, or circumvent TWIC access
control procedures.
(d) No person may cause or attempt to
cause another person to violate
paragraphs (a) through (c) of this
section.
16505
Cyber Attack .......................................................
Expressed or Implied Threat ..............................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16506
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Category
Description
Eliciting Information ............................................
Questioning that may pose a risk to transportation or national security, such as asking one or
more employees of an owner/operator subject to this part about particular facets of a facility’s conveyance’s purpose, operations, or security procedures.
Deliberate interactions with employees of an owner/operator subject to this part or challenges
to facilities or systems owned, operated, or used by an owner/operator subject to this part
that reveal physical, personnel, or cyber security capabilities.
Taking photographs or video of facilities, conveyances, or infrastructure owned, operated, or
used by an owner/operator subject to this part in a manner that may pose a risk to transportation or national security. Examples include taking photographs or video of infrequently
used access points, personnel performing security functions (for example, patrols, badge/vehicle checking), or security-related equipment (for example, perimeter fencing, security cameras).
Demonstrating unusual interest in facilities or loitering near conveyances, railcar routing appliances or any potentially critical infrastructure owned or operated by an owner/operator subject to this part in a manner that may pose a risk to transportation or national security. Examples include observation through binoculars, taking notes, or attempting to measure distances.
Acquisition and/or storage by an employee of an owner/operator subject to this part of materials such as cell phones, pagers, fuel, chemicals, toxic materials, and/or timers that may
pose a risk to transportation or national security (for example, storage of chemicals not
needed by an employee for the performance of his or her job duties).
Weapons or explosives in or around a facility, conveyance, or infrastructure of an owner/operator subject to this part that may present a risk to transportation or national security (for example, discovery of weapons inconsistent with the type or quantity traditionally used by
company security personnel).
Discovery or observation of suspicious items, activity or behavior in or around a facility, conveyance, or infrastructure of an owner/operator subject to this part that results in the disruption or termination of operations (for example, halting the operation of a conveyance while
law enforcement personnel investigate a suspicious bag, briefcase, or package).
Testing or Probing of Security ............................
Photography ........................................................
Observation or Surveillance ...............................
Materials Acquisition and/or Storage ..................
Weapons Discovery, Discharge, or Seizure. ......
Suspicious Items or Activity ................................
11. Revise part 1580 to read as
follows:
Subpart A—General
PART 1580—FREIGHT RAIL
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(b) of this section, this part includes
requirements for the following persons.
Specific sections in this part provide
detailed requirements.
(1) Each freight railroad carrier that
operates rolling equipment on track that
is part of the general railroad system of
transportation.
(2) Each rail hazardous materials
shipper.
(3) Each rail hazardous materials
receiver located within an HTUA.
(4) Each freight railroad carrier
serving as a host railroad to a freight
railroad operation described in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section or a
passenger operation described in
§ 1582.1 of this subchapter.
(5) Each owner/operator of private rail
cars, including business/office cars and
circus trains, on or connected to the
general railroad system of
transportation.
(b) This part does not apply to a
freight railroad carrier that operates
rolling equipment only on track inside
an installation that is not part of the
general railroad system of
transportation.
■
§ 1580.1
Subpart A—General
Sec.
1580.1
1580.3
1580.5
Scope.
Terms used in this part.
Preemptive effect.
Subpart B—Security Programs
1580.101 Applicability.
1580.103 [Reserved]
1580.105 [Reserved]
1580.107 [Reserved]
1580.109 [Reserved]
1580.111 [Reserved]
1580.113 Security training program general
requirements.
1580.115 Security training and knowledge
for security-sensitive employees.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Subpart C—Operations
1580.201 Applicability.
1580.203 Location and shipping
information.
1580.205 Chain of custody and control
requirements.
1580.207 Harmonization of Federal
regulation of nuclear facilities.
Appendix A to Part 1580—High Threat
Urban Areas (HTUAS)
Appendix B to Part 1580—Security-Sensitive
Job Functions for Freight Rail
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114; Pub. L. 110–53
(121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) secs. 1501 (6
U.S.C. 1151), 1512 (6 U.S.C. 1162) and 1517
(6 U.S.C. 1167).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
§ 1580.3
Scope.
Terms used in this part.
In addition to the terms in §§ 1500.3,
1500.5, and 1503.202 of subchapter A
and § 1570.3 of subchapter D of this
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
chapter, the following terms apply to
this part:
Class I means Class I as assigned by
regulations of the Surface
Transportation Board (STB) (49 CFR
part 1201; General Instructions 1–1).
Attended, in reference to a rail car,
means an employee—
(1) Is physically located on-site in
reasonable proximity to the rail car;
(2) Is capable of promptly responding
to unauthorized access or activity at or
near the rail car, including immediately
contacting law enforcement or other
authorities; and
(3) Immediately responds to any
unauthorized access or activity at or
near the rail car either personally or by
contacting law enforcement or other
authorities.
Document the transfer means
documentation uniquely identifying
that the rail car was attended during the
transfer of custody, including:
(1) Car initial and number.
(2) Identification of individuals who
attended the transfer (names or uniquely
identifying employee number).
(3) Location of transfer.
(4) Date and time the transfer was
completed.
High threat urban area (HTUA)
means, for purposes of this part, an area
comprising one or more cities and
surrounding areas including a 10-mile
buffer zone, as listed in appendix A to
this part 1580.
Maintains positive control means that
the rail hazardous materials receiver
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
and the railroad carrier communicate
and cooperate with each other to
provide for the security of the rail car
during the physical transfer of custody.
Attending the rail car is a component of
maintaining positive control.
Rail security-sensitive materials
(RSSM) means—
(1) A rail car containing more than
2,268 kg (5,000 lbs.) of a Division 1.1,
1.2, or 1.3 (explosive) material, as
defined in 49 CFR 173.50;
(2) A tank car containing a material
poisonous by inhalation as defined in
49 CFR 171.8, including anhydrous
ammonia, Division 2.3 gases poisonous
by inhalation as set forth in 49 CFR
173.115(c), and Division 6.1 liquids
meeting the defining criteria in 49 CFR
173.132(a)(1)(iii) and assigned to hazard
zone A or hazard zone B in accordance
with 49 CFR 173.133(a), excluding
residue quantities of these materials;
and
(3) A rail car containing a highway
route-controlled quantity of a Class 7
(radioactive) material, as defined in 49
CFR 173.403.
Residue means the hazardous material
remaining in a packaging, including a
tank car, after its contents have been
unloaded to the maximum extent
practicable and before the packaging is
either refilled or cleaned of hazardous
material and purged to remove any
hazardous vapors.
Security-sensitive employee means an
employee who performs—
(1) Service subject to the Federal
hours of service laws (49 U.S.C. chapter
211), regardless of whether the
employee actually performs such
service during a particular duty tour; or
(2) One or more of the securitysensitive job functions identified in
Appendix B to this part where the
security-sensitive function is performed
in the United States or in direct support
of the common carriage of persons or
property between a place in the United
States and any place outside of the
United States.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
§ 1580.5
Preemptive effect.
Under 49 U.S.C. 20106, issuance of
the regulations in this subchapter
preempts any State law, regulation, or
order covering the same subject matter,
except an additional or more stringent
law, regulation, or order that is
necessary to eliminate or reduce an
essentially local security hazard; that is
not incompatible with a law, regulation,
or order of the U.S. Government; and
that does not unreasonably burden
interstate commerce. For example,
under 49 U.S.C. 20106, issuance of 49
CFR 1580.205 preempts any State or
tribal law, rule, regulation, order or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
16507
recurrent training will need to be
submitted and approved by TSA.
(7) Plan for ensuring supervision of
Subpart B—Security Programs
untrained security-sensitive employees
performing functions identified in
§ 1580.101 Applicability.
Appendix B to this part.
This subpart applies to each of the
(8) Plan for notifying employees of
following owner/operators:
changes to security measures that could
(a) Described in § 1580.1(a)(1) of this
change information provided in
part that is a Class I freight railroad.
previously provided training.
(b) Described in § 1580.1(a)(1) of this
(9) Method(s) for evaluating the
part that transports one or more of the
effectiveness of the security training
categories and quantities of RSSM in an program in each area required by
HTUA.
§ 1580.115 of this part.
(c) Described in § 1580.1(a)(4) of this
(c) Relation to other training. (1)
part that serves as a host railroad to a
Training conducted by owner/operators
freight railroad described in paragraph
to comply other requirements or
(a) of (b) of this section or a passenger
standards, such as emergency
operation described in § 1582.101 of this preparedness training required by the
subchapter.
Department of Transportation (DOT) (49
CFR part 239) or other training for
§ 1580.103 [Reserved]
communicating with emergency
§ 1580.105 [Reserved]
responders to arrange the evacuation of
passengers, may be combined with and
§ 1580.107 [Reserved]
used to satisfy elements of the training
requirements in this subpart.
§ 1580.109 [Reserved]
(2) If the owner/operator submits a
§ 1580.111 [Reserved]
security training program that relies on
pre-existing or previous training
§ 1580.113 Security training program
materials to meet the requirements of
general requirements.
subpart B, the program submitted for
(a) Security training program
approval must include an index,
required. Each owner/operator
organized in the same sequence as the
identified in § 1580.101 of this part is
requirements in this subpart.
required to adopt and carry out a
(d) Submission and implementation.
security training program under this
The owner/operator must submit and
subpart.
implement the security training program
(b) General requirements. The security
in accordance with the schedules
training program must include the
identified in §§ 1570.109 and 1570.111
following information:
of this subchapter.
(1) Name of owner/operator.
(2) Name, title, telephone number,
§ 1580.115 Security training and
and email address of the primary
knowledge for security-sensitive
employees.
individual to be contacted with regard
to review of the security training
(a) Training required for securityprogram.
sensitive employees. No owner/operator
(3) Number, by specific job function
required to have a security training
category identified in Appendix B to
program under § 1580.101 of this part
this part, of security-sensitive
may use a security-sensitive employee
employees trained or to be trained.
to perform a function identified in
(4) Implementation schedule that
Appendix B to this part, unless that
identifies a specific date by which
individual has received training as part
initial and recurrent security training
of a security training program approved
required by § 1570.111 of this
by TSA under 49 CFR part 1570, subpart
subchapter will be completed.
B, or is under the direct supervision of
(5) Location where training program
an employee who has received the
records will be maintained.
training required by this section as
(6) Curriculum or lesson plan,
applicable to that security-sensitive
including learning objectives and
function.
method of delivery (such as instructor(b) Limits on use of untrained
led or computer-based training) for each employees. Notwithstanding paragraph
course used to meet the requirements of (a) of this section, a security-sensitive
§ 1580.115 of this part. TSA may request employee may not perform a securityadditional information regarding the
sensitive function for more than sixty
curriculum during the review and
(60) calendar days without receiving
approval process. If recurrent training
security training.
under § 1570.111 of this subchapter is
(c) Prepare. (1) Each owner/operator
not the same as initial training, a
must ensure that each of its securitycurriculum or lesson plan for the
sensitive employees with position- or
common law requirement covering the
same subject matter.
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
16508
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
function-specific responsibilities under
the owner/operator’s security program
has knowledge of how to fulfill those
responsibilities in the event of a security
threat, breach, or incident to ensure—
(i) Employees with responsibility for
transportation security equipment and
systems are aware of their
responsibilities and can verify the
equipment and systems are operating
and properly maintained; and
(ii) Employees with other duties and
responsibilities under the company’s
security plans and/or programs,
including those required by Federal law,
know their assignments and the steps or
resources needed to fulfill them.
(2) Each employee who performs any
security-related functions under
§ 1580.205 of this subpart must be
provided training specifically applicable
to the functions the employee performs.
As applicable, this training must
address—
(i) Inspecting rail cars for signs of
tampering or compromise, IEDs,
suspicious items, and items that do not
belong;
(ii) Identification of rail cars that
contain rail security-sensitive materials,
including the owner/operator’s
procedures for identifying rail securitysensitive material cars on train
documents, shipping papers, and in
computer train/car management
systems; and
(iii) Procedures for completing
transfer of custody documentation.
(d) Observe. Each owner/operator
must ensure that each of its securitysensitive employees has knowledge of
the observational skills necessary to
recognize—
(1) Suspicious and/or dangerous items
(such as substances, packages, or
conditions (for example, characteristics
of an IED and signs of equipment
tampering or sabotage);
(2) Combinations of actions and
individual behaviors that appear
suspicious and/or dangerous,
inappropriate, inconsistent, or out of the
ordinary for the employee’s work
environment, which could indicate a
threat to transportation security; and
(3) How a terrorist or someone with
malicious intent may attempt to gain
sensitive information or take advantage
of vulnerabilities.
(e) Assess. Each owner/operator must
ensure that each of its security-sensitive
employees has knowledge necessary
to—
(1) Determine whether the item,
individual, behavior, or situation
requires a response as a potential
terrorist threat based on the respective
transportation environment; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
(2) Identify appropriate responses
based on observations and context.
(f) Respond. Each owner/operator
must ensure that each of its securitysensitive employees has knowledge of
how to—
(1) Appropriately report a security
threat, including knowing how and
when to report internally to other
employees, supervisors, or management,
and externally to local, state, or Federal
agencies according to the owner/
operator’s security procedures or other
relevant plans;
(2) Interact with the public and first
responders at the scene of the threat or
incident, including communication
with passengers on evacuation and any
specific procedures for individuals with
disabilities and the elderly; and
(3) Use any applicable self-defense
devices or other protective equipment
provided to employees by the owner/
operator.
Subpart C—Operations
§ 1580.201
Applicability.
This subpart applies to the following:
(1) Each owner/operator described in
§ 1580.1(a)(1) of this part that transports
one or more of the categories and
quantities of rail security-sensitive
materials.
(2) Each owner/operator described in
§ 1580.1(a)(2) and (3) of this part.
§ 1580.203 Location and shipping
information.
(a) General requirement. Each owner/
operator described in § 1580.201 of this
part must have procedures in place to
determine the location and shipping
information for each rail car under its
physical custody and control that
contains one or more of the categories
and quantities of rail security-sensitive
materials.
(b) Required information. The
location and shipping information must
include the following:
(1) The rail car’s current location by
city, county, and state, including, for
freight railroad carriers, the railroad
milepost, track designation, and the
time that the rail car’s location was
determined.
(2) The rail car’s routing, if a freight
railroad carrier.
(3) A list of the total number of rail
cars containing rail security-sensitive
materials, broken down by—
(i) The shipping name prescribed for
the material in column 2 of the table in
49 CFR 172.101;
(ii) The hazard class or division
number prescribed for the material in
column 3 of the table in 49 CFR
172.101; and
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(iii) The identification number
prescribed for the material in column 4
of the table in 49 CFR 172.101.
(4) Each rail car’s initial and number.
(5) Whether the rail car is in a train,
rail yard, siding, rail spur, or rail
hazardous materials shipper or receiver
facility, including the name of the rail
yard or siding designation.
(c) Timing-Class I freight railroad
carriers. Upon request by TSA, each
Class I freight railroad carrier described
in paragraph (a) of this section must
provide the location and shipping
information to TSA no later than—
(1) Five minutes if the request applies
to a single (one) rail car; and
(2) Thirty minutes if the request
concerns multiple rail cars or a
geographic region.
(d) Timing-other than Class I freight
railroad carriers. Upon request by TSA,
all owner/operators described in
paragraph (a) of this section, other than
Class I freight railroad carriers, must
provide the location and shipping
information to TSA no later than 30
minutes, regardless of the number of
cars covered by the request.
(e) Method. All owner/operators
described in paragraph (a) of this
section must provide the requested
location and shipping information to
TSA by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronic data transmission in
spreadsheet format.
(2) Electronic data transmission in
Hyper Text Markup Language (HTML)
format.
(3) Electronic data transmission in
Extensible Markup Language (XML).
(4) Facsimile transmission of a hard
copy spreadsheet in tabular format.
(5) Posting the information to a secure
website address approved by TSA.
(6) Another format approved by TSA.
(f) Telephone number. Each owner/
operator described in § 1580.201 of this
part must provide a telephone number
for use by TSA to request the
information required in paragraph (b) of
this section.
(1) The telephone number must be
monitored at all times.
(2) A telephone number that requires
a call back (such as an answering
service, answering machine, or beeper
device) does not meet the requirements
of this paragraph.
§ 1580.205 Chain of custody and control
requirements.
(a) Within or outside of an HTUA, rail
hazardous materials shipper
transferring to carrier. Except as
provided in paragraph (g) of this
section, at each location within or
outside of an HTUA, a rail hazardous
materials shipper transferring custody of
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
a rail car containing one or more of the
categories and quantities of rail securitysensitive materials to a freight railroad
carrier must do the following:
(1) Physically inspect the rail car
before loading for signs of tampering,
including closures and seals; other signs
that the security of the car may have
been compromised; and suspicious
items or items that do not belong,
including the presence of an improvised
explosive device.
(2) Keep the rail car in a rail secure
area from the time the security
inspection required by paragraph (a)(1)
of this section or by 49 CFR 173.31(d),
whichever occurs first, until the freight
railroad carrier takes physical custody
of the rail car.
(3) Document the transfer of custody
to the railroad carrier in hard copy or
electronically.
(b) Within or outside of an HTUA,
carrier receiving from a rail hazardous
materials shipper. At each location
within or outside of an HTUA where a
freight railroad carrier receives from a
rail hazardous materials shipper
custody of a rail car containing one or
more of the categories and quantities of
rail security-sensitive materials, the
freight railroad carrier must document
the transfer in hard copy or
electronically and perform the required
security inspection in accordance with
49 CFR 174.9.
(c) Within an HTUA, carrier
transferring to carrier. Within an HTUA,
whenever a freight railroad carrier
transfers a rail car containing one or
more of the categories and quantities of
rail security-sensitive materials to
another freight railroad carrier, each
freight railroad carrier must adopt and
carry out procedures to ensure that the
rail car is not left unattended at any
time during the physical transfer of
custody. These procedures must include
the receiving freight railroad carrier
performing the required security
inspection in accordance with 49 CFR
174.9. Both the transferring and the
receiving railroad carrier must
document the transfer of custody in
hard copy or electronically.
(d) Outside of an HTUA, carrier
transferring to carrier. Outside an
HTUA, whenever a freight railroad
carrier transfers a rail car containing one
or more of the categories and quantities
of rail security-sensitive materials to
another freight railroad carrier, and the
rail car containing this hazardous
material may subsequently enter an
HTUA, each freight railroad carrier must
adopt and carry out procedures to
ensure that the rail car is not left
unattended at any time during the
physical transfer of custody. These
procedures must include the receiving
railroad carrier performing the required
security inspection in accordance with
49 CFR 174.9. Both the transferring and
the receiving railroad carrier must
document the transfer of custody in
hard copy or electronically.
(e) Within an HTUA, carrier
transferring to rail hazardous materials
receiver. A freight railroad carrier
delivering a rail car containing one or
more of the categories and quantities of
rail security-sensitive materials to a rail
hazardous materials receiver located
within an HTUA must not leave the rail
car unattended in a non-secure area
until the rail hazardous materials
receiver accepts custody of the rail car.
Both the railroad carrier and the rail
hazardous materials receiver must
document the transfer of custody in
hard copy or electronically.
(f) Within an HTUA, rail hazardous
materials receiver receiving from carrier.
Except as provided in paragraph (j) of
this section, a rail hazardous materials
receiver located within an HTUA that
receives a rail car containing one or
more of the categories and quantities of
rail security-sensitive materials from a
freight railroad carrier must—
(1) Ensure that the rail hazardous
materials receiver or railroad carrier
maintains positive control of the rail car
during the physical transfer of custody
of the rail car;
(2) Keep the rail car in a rail secure
area until the car is unloaded; and
(3) Document the transfer of custody
from the railroad carrier in hard copy or
electronically.
(g) Within or outside of an HTUA, rail
hazardous materials receiver rejecting
car. This section does not apply to a rail
hazardous materials receiver that does
not routinely offer, prepare, or load for
transportation by rail one or more of the
categories and quantities of rail securitysensitive materials. If such a receiver
rejects and returns a rail car containing
one or more of the categories and
16509
quantities of rail security-sensitive
materials to the originating offeror or
shipper, the requirements of this section
do not apply to the receiver. The
requirements of this section do apply to
any railroad carrier to which the
receiver transfers custody of the rail car.
(h) Document retention. Covered
entities must maintain the documents
required under this section for at least
60 calendar days and make them
available to TSA upon request.
(i) Rail secure area. The rail
hazardous materials shipper and the rail
hazardous materials receiver must use
physical security measures to ensure
that no unauthorized individual gains
access to the rail secure area.
(j) Exemption for rail hazardous
materials receivers. A rail hazardous
materials receiver located within an
HTUA may request from TSA an
exemption from some or all of the
requirements of this section if the
receiver demonstrates that the potential
risk from its activities is insufficient to
warrant compliance with this section.
TSA will consider all relevant
circumstances, including the following:
(1) The amounts and types of all
hazardous materials received.
(2) The geography of the area
surrounding the receiver’s facility.
(3) Proximity to entities that may be
attractive targets, including other
businesses, housing, schools, and
hospitals.
(4) Any information regarding threats
to the facility.
(5) Other circumstances that indicate
the potential risk of the receiver’s
facility does not warrant compliance
with this section.
§ 1580.207 Harmonization of Federal
regulation of nuclear facilities.
TSA will coordinate activities under
this subpart with the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) and the Department
of Energy (DOE) with respect to
regulation of rail hazardous materials
shippers and receivers that are also
licensed or regulated by the NRC or
DOE under the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended, to maintain
consistency with the requirements
imposed by the NRC and DOE.
Appendix A to Part 1580—High Threat
Urban Areas (HTUAs)
State
Urban area
Geographic areas
AZ .......................
Phoenix Area ................
CA ......................
Anaheim/Santa Ana
Area.
Chandler, Gilbert, Glendale, Mesa, Peoria, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Anaheim, Costa Mesa, Garden Grove, Fullerton, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Orange, Santa Ana,
and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16510
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
State
Urban area
Geographic areas
Bay Area .......................
Berkeley, Daly City, Fremont, Hayward, Oakland, Palo Alto, Richmond, San Francisco, San Jose,
Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Vallejo, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Burbank, Glendale, Inglewood, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Pasadena, Santa Monica, Santa
Clarita, Torrance, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border
of the combined area.
Elk Grove, Sacramento, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Chula Vista, Escondido, and San Diego, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the
combined area.
Arvada, Aurora, Denver, Lakewood, Westminster, Thornton, and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the border of the combined area.
National Capital Region and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood, Miami Gardens, Miramar, Pembroke Pines, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Jacksonville and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Hialeah, Miami, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Orlando and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Clearwater, St. Petersburg, Tampa, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Atlanta and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Honolulu and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Chicago and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Indianapolis and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Louisville and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Baton Rouge and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
New Orleans and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Boston, Cambridge, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Baltimore and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Detroit, Sterling Heights, Warren, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined
area.
Minneapolis, St. Paul, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined entity.
Independence, Kansas City (MO), Kansas City (KS), Olathe, Overland Park, and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined area.
St. Louis and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Charlotte and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Omaha and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Elizabeth, Jersey City, Newark, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined
area.
Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined entity.
Buffalo and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
New York City, Yonkers, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Cincinnati and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Cleveland and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Columbus and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Oregon, Toledo, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Norman, Oklahoma and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Portland, Vancouver, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Philadelphia and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Pittsburgh and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Memphis and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Arlington, Carrollton, Dallas, Fort Worth, Garland, Grand Prairie, Irving, Mesquite, Plano, and a
10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Houston, Pasadena, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined entity.
San Antonio and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Seattle, Bellevue, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border of the combined area.
Milwaukee and a 10-mile buffer extending from the city border.
Los Angeles/Long
Beach Area.
Sacramento Area ..........
San Diego Area ............
CO ......................
DC ......................
FL .......................
Denver ..........................
Area ..............................
National Capital Region
Fort Lauderdale Area ....
Jacksonville Area ..........
Miami Area ....................
Orlando Area ................
Tampa Area ..................
GA ......................
HI ........................
IL ........................
IN ........................
KY ......................
LA .......................
MA ......................
MD ......................
MI .......................
Atlanta Area ..................
Honolulu Area ...............
Chicago Area ................
Indianapolis Area ..........
Louisville Area ..............
Baton Rouge Area ........
New Orleans Area ........
Boston Area ..................
Baltimore Area ..............
Detroit Area ...................
MN ......................
MO .....................
Twin Cities Area ............
Kansas City Area ..........
NC ......................
NE ......................
NJ .......................
NV ......................
NY ......................
OH ......................
OK ......................
OR ......................
PA ......................
TN ......................
TX .......................
WA .....................
WI .......................
St. Louis Area ...............
Charlotte Area ...............
Omaha Area .................
Jersey City/Newark
Area.
Las Vegas Area ............
Buffalo Area ..................
New York City Area ......
Cincinnati Area .............
Cleveland Area .............
Columbus Area .............
Toledo Area ..................
Oklahoma City Area ......
Portland Area ................
Philadelphia Area ..........
Pittsburgh Area .............
Memphis Area ...............
Dallas/Fort Worth/Arlington Area.
Houston Area ................
San Antonio Area .........
Seattle Area ..................
Milwaukee Area ............
Appendix B to Part 1580—SecuritySensitive Functions for Freight Rail
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
This table identifies security-sensitive
job functions for owner/operators
regulated under this part. All employees
performing security-sensitive functions
are ‘‘security-sensitive employees’’ for
purposes of this rule and must be
trained.
Categories
Security-sensitive job functions for
freight rail
A. Operating a vehicle .............................................................................
1. Employees who operate or directly control the movements of locomotives or
other self-powered rail vehicles.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Examples of job titles applicable to these functions *
Engineer, conductor
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Security-sensitive job functions for
freight rail
Categories
B. Inspecting and maintaining vehicles ...................................................
C. Inspecting or maintaining building or transportation infrastructure ....
D. Controlling dispatch or movement of a vehicle ..................................
E. Providing security of the owner/operator’s equipment and property ..
F. Loading or unloading cargo or baggage .............................................
G. Interacting with travelling public (on board a vehicle or within a
transportation facility).
H. Complying with security programs or measures, including those required by Federal law.
2. Train conductor, trainman, brakeman, or
utility employee or performs acceptance
inspections, couples and uncouples rail
cars, applies handbrakes, or similar functions.
3. Employees covered under the Federal
hours of service laws as ‘‘train employees.’’ See 49 U.S.C. 21101(5) and
21103..
Employees who inspect or repair rail cars
and locomotives.
1. Employees who— ...................................
a. Maintain, install, or inspect communications and signal equipment.
b. Maintain, install, or inspect track
and structures, including, but not
limited to, bridges, trestles, and tunnels.
2. Employees covered under the Federal
hours of service laws as ‘‘signal employees.’’ See 49 U.S.C. 21101(3) and
21104.
1. Employees who— ...................................
a. Dispatch, direct, or control the
movement of trains.
b. Operate or supervise the operations
of moveable bridges.
c. Supervise the activities of train
crews, car movements, and switching operations in a yard or terminal.
2. Employees covered under the Federal
hours of service laws as ‘‘dispatching
service employees.’’ See 49 U.S.C.
21101(2) and 21105.
Employees who provide for the security of
the railroad carrier’s equipment and
property, including acting as a railroad
police officer (as that term is defined in
49 CFR 207.2).
Includes, but is not limited to, employees
that load or unload hazardous materials.
Employees of a freight railroad operating in
passenger service.
1. Employees who serve as security coordinators designated in § 1570.201 of this
subchapter, as well as any designated
alternates or secondary security coordinators.
2. Employees who—.
a. Conduct training and testing of employees when the training or testing
is required by TSA’s security regulations.
b. Perform inspections or operations
required by § 1580.205 of this subchapter.
c. Manage or direct implementation of
security plan requirements.
16511
Examples of job titles applicable to these functions *
Carman, car repairman,
car inspector, engineer,
conductor.
Signalman, signal maintainer, track-man, gang
foreman, bridge and
building laborer,
roadmaster, bridge, and
building inspector/operator.
Yardmaster, dispatcher,
block operator, bridge
operator.
Police officer, special
agent; patrolman;
watchman; guard.
Service track employee.
Conductor, engineer,
agent.
Security coordinator, train
master, assistant train
master, roadmaster, division roadmaster.
* These job titles are provided solely as a resource to help understand the functions described; whether an employee must be trained is based
upon the function, not the job title.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
■
12. Add part 1582 to read as follows:
PART 1582—PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION AND PASSENGER
RAILROAD SECURITY
Subpart A—General
Sec.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
1582.1
1582.3
1582.5
Scope.
Terms used in this part.
Preemptive effect.
Subpart B—Security Programs
1582.101
1582.103
1582.105
1582.107
PO 00000
Applicability.
[Reserved]
[Reserved]
[Reserved]
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1582.109 [Reserved]
1582.111 [Reserved]
1582.113 Security training program general
requirements.
1582.115 Security training and knowledge
for security-sensitive employees.
Appendix A to Part 1582—Determinations
for Public Transportation and Passenger
Railroads
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16512
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Appendix B to Part 1582—Security-Sensitive
Job Functions For Public Transportation
and Passenger Railroads
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114; Pub. L. 110–53
(121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) secs. 1402 (6
U.S.C. 1131), 1405 (6 U.S.C. 1134), and 1408
(6 U.S.C. 1137).
Subpart A—General
§ 1582.1
Scope.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(b) of this section, this part includes
requirements for the following persons.
Specific sections in this part provide
detailed requirements.
(1) Each passenger railroad carrier.
(2) Each public transportation agency.
(3) Each operator of a rail transit
system that is not operating on track
that is part of the general railroad
system of transportation, including
heavy rail transit, light rail transit,
automated guideway, cable car, inclined
plane, funicular, and monorail systems.
(4) Each tourist, scenic, historic, and
excursion rail owner/operator, whether
operating on or off the general railroad
system of transportation.
(b) This part does not apply to a ferry
system required to conduct training
pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 70103.
§ 1582.3
Terms used in this part.
In addition to the terms in §§ 1500.3,
1500.5, and 1503.202 of subchapter A
and § 1570.3 of subchapter D of this
chapter, the following term applies to
this part.
Security-sensitive employee means an
employee whose responsibilities for the
owner/operator include one or more of
the security-sensitive job functions
identified in appendix B to this part if
the security-sensitive function is
performed in the United States or in
direct support of the common carriage
of persons or property between a place
in the United States and any place
outside of the United States.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
§ 1582.5
Preemptive effect.
Under 49 U.S.C. 20106, issuance of
the passenger railroad and public
transportation regulations in this
subchapter preempts any State law,
regulation, or order covering the same
subject matter, except an additional or
more stringent law, regulation, or order
that is necessary to eliminate or reduce
an essentially local security hazard; that
is not incompatible with a law,
regulation, or order of the U.S.
Government; and that does not
unreasonably burden interstate
commerce.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
performing functions identified in
Appendix B to this part.
§ 1582.101 Applicability.
(8) Plan for notifying employees of
The requirements of this subpart
changes to security measures that could
apply to the following:
change information provided in
(a) Amtrak (also known as the
previously provided training.
National Railroad Passenger
(9) Method(s) for evaluating the
Corporation).
effectiveness of the security training
(b) Each owner/operator identified in
program in each area required by
Appendix A to this part.
§ 1582.115 of this part.
(c) Each owner/operator described in
(c) Relation to other training. (1)
§ 1582.1(a)(1) through (3) of this part
that serves as a host railroad to a freight Training conducted by owner/operators
operation described in § 1580.301 of this to comply other requirements or
standards, such as emergency
subchapter or to a passenger train
preparedness training required by the
operation described in paragraph (a)(1)
Department of Transportation (DOT) (49
or (a)(2) of this section.
CFR part 239) or other training for
§ 1582.103 [Reserved]
communicating with emergency
responders to arrange the evacuation of
§ 1582.105 [Reserved]
passengers, may be combined with and
§ 1582.107 [Reserved]
used to satisfy elements of the training
requirements in this subpart.
§ 1582.109 [Reserved]
(2) If the owner/operator submits a
security training program that relies on
§ 1582.111 [Reserved]
pre-existing or previous training
§ 1582.113 Security training program
materials to meet the requirements of
general requirements.
subpart B, the program submitted for
(a) Security training program
approval must include an index,
required. Each owner/operator
organized in the same sequence as the
identified in § 1582.101 of this part is
requirements in this subpart.
required to adopt and carry out a
(d) Submission and implementation.
security training program under this
The owner/operator must submit and
subpart.
(b) General requirements. The security implement the security training program
in accordance with the schedules
training program must include the
identified in §§ 1570.109 and 1570.111
following information:
of this subchapter.
(1) Name of owner/operator.
(2) Name, title, telephone number,
§ 1582.115 Security training and
and email address of the primary
knowledge for security-sensitive
individual to be contacted with regard
employees.
to review of the security training
(a) Training required for securityprogram.
sensitive employees. No owner/operator
(3) Number, by specific job function
required to have a security training
category identified in Appendix B to
program under § 1582.101 of this part
this part, of security-sensitive
may use a security-sensitive employee
employees trained or to be trained.
to perform a function identified in
(4) Implementation schedule that
appendix B to this part unless that
identifies a specific date by which
individual has received training as part
initial and recurrent security training
of a security training program approved
required by § 1570.111 of this
by TSA under 49 CFR part 1570, subpart
subchapter will be completed.
B, or is under the direct supervision of
(5) Location where training program
an employee who has received the
records will be maintained.
training required by this section as
(6) Curriculum or lesson plan,
applicable to that security-sensitive
including learning objectives and
function.
method of delivery (such as instructor(b) Limits on use of untrained
led or computer-based training) for each
course used to meet the requirements of employees. Notwithstanding paragraph
§ 1582.115 of this part. TSA may request (a) of this section, a security-sensitive
employee may not perform a securityadditional information regarding the
sensitive function for more than sixty
curriculum during the review and
(60) calendar days without receiving
approval process. If recurrent training
security training.
under § 1570.111 of this subchapter is
(c) Prepare. Each owner/operator
not the same as initial training, a
must ensure that each of its securitycurriculum or lesson plan for the
sensitive employees with position- or
recurrent training will need to be
function-specific responsibilities under
submitted and approved by TSA.
(7) Plan for ensuring supervision of
the owner/operator’s security program
untrained security-sensitive employees
have knowledge of how to fulfill those
Subpart B—Security Programs
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
responsibilities in the event of a security
threat, breach, or incident to ensure—
(1) Employees with responsibility for
transportation security equipment and
systems are aware of their
responsibilities and can verify the
equipment and systems are operating
and properly maintained; and
(2) Employees with other duties and
responsibilities under the company’s
security plans and/or programs,
including those required by Federal law,
know their assignments and the steps or
resources needed to fulfill them.
(d) Observe. Each owner/operator
must ensure that each of its securitysensitive employees has knowledge of
the observational skills necessary to
recognize—
(1) Suspicious and/or dangerous items
(such as substances, packages, or
conditions (for example, characteristics
of an IED and signs of equipment
tampering or sabotage);
State
CA
(2) Combinations of actions and
individual behaviors that appear
suspicious and/or dangerous,
inappropriate, inconsistent, or out of the
ordinary for the employee’s work
environment, which could indicate a
threat to transportation security; and
(3) How a terrorist or someone with
malicious intent may attempt to gain
sensitive information or take advantage
of vulnerabilities.
(e) Assess. Each owner/operator must
ensure that each of its security-sensitive
employees has knowledge necessary
to—
(1) Determine whether the item,
individual, behavior, or situation
requires a response as a potential
terrorist threat based on the respective
transportation environment; and
(2) Identify appropriate responses
based on observations and context.
(f) Respond. Each owner/operator
must ensure that each of its security-
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
sensitive employees has knowledge of
how to—
(1) Appropriately report a security
threat, including knowing how and
when to report internally to other
employees, supervisors, or management,
and externally to local, state, or Federal
agencies according to the owner/
operator’s security procedures or other
relevant plans;
(2) Interact with the public and first
responders at the scene of the threat or
incident, including communication
with passengers on evacuation and any
specific procedures for individuals with
disabilities and the elderly; and
(3) Use any applicable self-defense
devices or other protective equipment
provided to employees by the owner/
operator.
Appendix A to Part 1582—
Determinations for Public
Transportation and Passenger
Railroads
Urban area
Systems
Bay Area .........................................
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit).
Altamont -Corridor Express (ACE).
City and County of San Francisco (San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District)
(BART).
Central Contra Costa Transit Authority.
≤Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District (GGBHTD).
Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (PCJPB) (Caltrain).
San Francisco Municipal Railway (MUNI) (San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency).
San Mateo County Transit District (San Mateo County Transit Authority) (SamTrans).
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA).
Transbay Joint Powers Authority.
City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT)
Foothill Transit.
Long Beach Transit (LBT).
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA).
City of Montebello (Montebello Bus Lines) (MBL).
Omnitrans (OMNI).
Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA).
City of Santa Monica (Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus) (Big Blue Bus).
Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink).
Arlington County, Virginia (Arlington Transit).
City of Alexandria (Alexandria Transit Company) (Dash).
Fairfax County Department of Transportation—Fairfax Connector Bus System.
Maryland Transit Administration (MTA).
Montgomery County Department of Transportation (Ride-On Montgomery County Transit).
Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission.
Prince George’s County Department of Public Works and Transportation (The Bus).
Virginia Railway Express (VRE).
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA).
Georgia Regional Transportation Authority (GRTA, within State Road and Tollway Authority (SRTA)).
Greater Los Angeles Area (Los Angeles/Long Beach and Anaheim/
Santa Ana urban Areas)..
DC/MD/VA
Greater National Capital Region
(National Capital Region and Baltimore urban Areas)..
GA
Atlanta Area ....................................
Metropolitan
Atlanta
Rapid Transit Authority
(MARTA)..
IL/IN
Chicago Area ..................................
MA
Boston Area ....................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16513
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Chicago Transit Authority (CTA).
Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation (Metra/NIRCRC).
Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD).
PACE Suburban Bus Company.
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA).
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16514
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
State
Urban area
Systems
NY/NJ/CT
New York City/Northern New Jersey Area (New York City and
Jersey City/Newark urban Areas).
PA/NJ
Philadelphia Area ............................
Connecticut Department of Transportation (CDOT).
Connecticut Transit (Hartford Division and New Haven Divisions of CTTransit).
Metropolitan Transportation Authority (All Agencies).
New Jersey Transit Corp. (NJT).
New York City Department of Transportation.
Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation (Port Authority of New York and New Jersey)
(PANYNJ) (excluding ferry).
Westchester County Department of Transportation Bee-Line System (The Bee-Line System).
Delaware River Port Authority (DRPA)—Port Authority Transit Corporation (PATCO).
Delaware Transit Corporation (DTC).
New Jersey Transit Corp. (NJT) (covered under NY).
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation.
Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA).
Appendix B to Part 1582—SecuritySensitive Job Functions For Public
Transportation and Passenger
Railroads
This table identifies security-sensitive
job functions for owner/operators
regulated under this part. All employees
performing security-sensitive functions
are ‘‘security-sensitive employees’’ for
purposes of this rule and must be
trained.
Security-sensitive job functions for public transportation and passenger
railroads (PTPR)
Categories
A. Operating a vehicle
B. Inspecting and maintaining vehicles
C. Inspecting or maintaining building or transportation infrastructure .....
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
D. Controlling dispatch or movement of a vehicle ...................................
E. Providing security of the owner/operator’s equipment and property ...
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
1. Employees who—
a. Operate or control the movements of trains, other rail vehicles, or
transit buses.
b. Act as train conductor, trainman, brakeman, or utility employee or
performs acceptance inspections, couples and uncouples rail cars,
applies handbrakes, or similar functions.
2. Employees covered under the Federal hours of service laws as
‘‘train employees.’’ See 49 U.S.C. 21101(5) and 21103.
Employees who—
1. Perform activities related to the diagnosis, inspection, maintenance,
adjustment, repair, or overhaul of electrical or mechanical equipment
relating to vehicles, including functions performed by mechanics and
automotive technicians.
2. Provide cleaning services to vehicles owned, operated, or controlled
by an owner/operator regulated under this subchapter.
Employees who—
1. Maintain, install, or inspect communication systems and signal
equipment related to the delivery of transportation services.
2. Maintain, install, or inspect track and structures, including, but not
limited to, bridges, trestles, and tunnels.
3. Provide cleaning services to stations and terminals owned, operated,
or controlled by an owner/operator regulated under this subchapter
that are accessible to the general public or passengers.
4. Provide maintenance services to stations, terminals, yards, tunnels,
bridges, and operation control centers owned, operated, or controlled
by an owner/operator regulated under this subchapter.
5. Employees covered under the Federal hours of service laws as
‘‘signal employees.’’ See 49 U.S.C. 21101(4) and 21104.
Employees who—
1. Dispatch, report, transport, receive or deliver orders pertaining to
specific vehicles, coordination of transportation schedules, tracking of
vehicles and equipment.
2. Manage day-to-day management delivery of transportation services
and the prevention of, response to, and redress of service disruptions.
3. Supervise the activities of train crews, car movements, and switching operations in a yard or terminal.
4. Dispatch, direct, or control the movement of trains or buses.
5. Operate or supervise the operations of moveable bridges.
6. Employees covered under the Federal hours of service laws as
‘‘dispatching service employees.’’ See 49 U.S.C. 21101(2) and
21105.
Employees who—
1. Provide for the security of PTPR equipment and property, including
acting as a police officer.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Security-sensitive job functions for public transportation and passenger
railroads (PTPR)
Categories
F. Loading or unloading cargo or baggage
G. Interacting with travelling public (on board a vehicle or within a
transportation facility).
H. Complying with security programs or measures, including those required by Federal law.
■
13. Add part 1584 to read as follows:
PART 1584—HIGHWAY AND MOTOR
CARRIER SECURITY
Subpart A—General
Sec.
1584.1 Scope.
1584.3 Terms used in this part.
Subpart B—Security Programs
1584.101 Applicability.
1584.103 [Reserved]
1584.105 [Reserved]
1584.107 [Reserved]
1584.109 [Reserved]
1584.111 [Reserved]
1584.113 Security training program general
requirements.
1584.115 Security training and knowledge
for security-sensitive employees.
Appendix A to Part 1584—Urban Area
Determinations for Over-the-Road Buses
Appendix B to Part 1584—SecuritySensitive Job Functions For Over-theRoad Buses
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114; Pub. L. 110–53
(121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) secs. 1501 (6
U.S.C. 1151), 1531 (6 U.S.C. 1181), and 1534
(6 U.S.C. 1184).
Subpart A—General
§ 1584.1
Scope.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
This part includes requirements for
persons providing transportation by an
over-the-road bus (OTRB). Specific
sections in this part provide detailed
requirements.
§ 1584.3
Terms used in this part.
In addition to the terms in §§ 1500.3,
1500.5, and 1503.202 of subchapter A
and § 1570.3 of subchapter D of this
chapter, the following term applies to
this part.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
16515
2. Patrol and inspect property of an owner/operator regulated under
this subchapter to protect the property, personnel, passengers and/or
cargo.
Employees who load, or oversee loading of, property tendered by or on
behalf of a passenger on or off of a portion of a train that will be inaccessible to the passenger while the train is in operation.
Employees who provide services to passengers on-board a train or
bus, including collecting tickets or cash for fares, providing information, and other similar services. Including:
1. On-board food or beverage employees.
2. Functions on behalf of an owner/operator regulated under this subchapter that require regular interaction with travelling public within a
transportation facility, such as ticket agents.
1. Employees who serve as security coordinators designated in
§ 1570.201 of this subchapter, as well as any designated alternates
or secondary security coordinators.
2. Employees who—
a. Conduct training and testing of employees when the training or testing is required by TSA’s security regulations.
b. Manage or direct implementation of security plan requirements.
to review of the security training
program.
(3) Number, by specific job function
category identified in Appendix B to
this part, of security-sensitive
employees trained or to be trained.
(4) Implementation schedule that
identifies a specific date by which
initial and recurrent security training
required by § 1570.111 of this
subchapter will be completed.
(5) Location where training program
Subpart B—Security Programs
records will be maintained.
(6) Curriculum or lesson plan,
§ 1584.101 Applicability.
including learning objectives and
The requirements of this subpart
method of delivery (such as instructorapply to each OTRB owner/operator
led or computer-based training) for each
providing fixed-route service that
course used to meet the requirements of
originates, travels through, or ends in a
§ 1584.115 of this part. TSA may request
geographic location identified in
additional information regarding the
appendix A to this part.
curriculum during the review and
approval process. If recurrent training
§ 1584.103 [Reserved]
under § 1570.111 of this subchapter is
§ 1584.105 [Reserved]
not the same as initial training, a
curriculum or lesson plan for the
§ 1584.107 [Reserved]
recurrent training will need to be
submitted and approved by TSA.
§ 1584.109 [Reserved]
(7) Plan for ensuring supervision of
§ 1584.111 [Reserved]
untrained security-sensitive employees
performing functions identified in
§ 1584.113 Security training program
Appendix B to this part.
general requirements.
(8) Plan for notifying employees of
(a) Security training program
changes to security measures that could
required. Each owner/operator
change information provided in
identified in § 1584.101 of this part is
previously provided training.
required to adopt and carry out a
(9) Method(s) for evaluating the
security training program under this
effectiveness of the security training
subpart.
program in each area required by
(b) General requirements. The security § 1584.115 of this part.
training program must include the
(c) Relation to other training. (1)
following information:
Training conducted by owner/operators
(1) Name of owner/operator.
to comply other requirements or
standards may be combined with and
(2) Name, title, telephone number,
used to satisfy elements of the training
and email address of the primary
requirements in this subpart.
individual to be contacted with regard
Security-sensitive employee means an
employee whose responsibilities for the
owner/operator include one or more of
the security-sensitive job functions
identified in Appendix B to this part
where the security-sensitive function is
performed in the United States or in
direct support of the common carriage
of persons or property between a place
in the United States and any place
outside of the United States.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
16516
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
(2) If the owner/operator submits a
security training program that relies on
pre-existing or previous training
materials to meet the requirements of
subpart B, the program submitted for
approval must include an index,
organized in the same sequence as the
requirements in this subpart.
(d) Submission and Implementation.
The owner/operator must submit and
implement the security training program
in accordance with the schedules
identified in §§ 1570.109 and 1570.111
of this subchapter.
§ 1584.115 Security training and
knowledge for security-sensitive
employees.
(a) Training required for securitysensitive employees. No owner/operator
required to have a security training
program under § 1584.101 of this part
may use a security-sensitive employee
to perform a function identified in
Appendix B to this part unless that
individual has received training as part
of a security training program approved
by TSA under 49 CFR part 1570, subpart
B, or is under the direct supervision of
an employee who has received the
training required by this section as
applicable to that security-sensitive
function.
(b) Limits on use of untrained
employees. Notwithstanding paragraph
(a) of this section, a security-sensitive
employee may not perform a securitysensitive function for more than sixty
(60) calendar days without receiving
security training.
State
CA
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
DC (VA, MD,
and WV).
(c) Prepare. Each owner/operator
must ensure that each of its securitysensitive employees with position- or
function-specific responsibilities under
the owner/operator’s security program
have knowledge of how to fulfill those
responsibilities in the event of a security
threat, breach, or incident to ensure—
(1) Employees with responsibility for
transportation security equipment and
systems are aware of their
responsibilities and can verify the
equipment and systems are operating
and properly maintained; and
(2) Employees with other duties and
responsibilities under the company’s
security plans and/or programs,
including those required by Federal law,
know their assignments and the steps or
resources needed to fulfill them.
(d) Observe. Each owner/operator
must ensure that each of its securitysensitive employees has knowledge of
the observational skills necessary to
recognize—
(1) Suspicious and/or dangerous items
(such as substances, packages, or
conditions (for example, characteristics
of an IED and signs of equipment
tampering or sabotage);
(2) Combinations of actions and
individual behaviors that appear
suspicious and/or dangerous,
inappropriate, inconsistent, or out of the
ordinary for the employee’s work
environment, which could indicate a
threat to transportation security; and
(3) How a terrorist or someone with
malicious intent may attempt to gain
Urban area
Anaheim/Los Angeles/Long Beach/
Santa Ana Areas.
San Diego Area ..............................
San Francisco Bay Area .................
National Capital Region ..................
Chicago Area ..................................
MA
Boston Area ....................................
NY (NJ and
PA).
New York City/Jersey City/Newark
Area.
PA (DE and
NJ).
Philadelphia Area/Southern
Jersey Area.
TX
Dallas Fort Worth/Arlington Area ....
New
Houston Area ..................................
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
Appendix A to Part 1584—Urban Area
Determinations for Over-the-Road
Buses
Geographic areas
IL/IN
VerDate Sep<11>2014
sensitive information or take advantage
of vulnerabilities.
(e) Assess. Each owner/operator must
ensure that each of its security-sensitive
employees has knowledge necessary
to—
(1) Determine whether the item,
individual, behavior, or situation
requires a response as a potential
terrorist threat based on the respective
transportation environment; and
(2) Identify appropriate responses
based on observations and context.
(f) Respond. Each owner/operator
must ensure that each of its securitysensitive employees has knowledge of
how to—
(1) Appropriately report a security
threat, including knowing how and
when to report internally to other
employees, supervisors, or management,
and externally to local, state, or Federal
agencies according to the owner/
operator’s security procedures or other
relevant plans;
(2) Interact with the public and first
responders at the scene of the threat or
incident, including communication
with passengers on evacuation and any
specific procedures for individuals with
disabilities and the elderly; and
(3) Use any applicable self-defense
devices or other protective equipment
provided to employees by the owner/
operator.
PO 00000
Los Angeles and Orange Counties.
San Diego County.
Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties.
District of Columbia; Counties of Calvert, Charles, Frederick, Montgomery, and Prince
George’s, MD; Counties of Arlington, Clarke, Fairfax, Fauquier, Loudoun, Prince William, Spotsylvania, Stafford, and Warren County, VA; Cities of Alexandria, Fairfax,
Falls Church, Fredericksburg, Manassas, and Manassas Park City, VA; Jefferson
County, WV.
Counties of Cook, DeKalb, DuPage, Grundy, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry, and Will, IL;
Counties of Jasper, Lake, Newton, and Porter, IN; Kenosha County, WI.
Counties of Essex, Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk, Middlesex, MA; Counties of Rockingham
and Strafford, NH.
Counties of Bronx, Kings, Nassau, New York, Putnam, Queens, Richmond, Rockland,
Suffolk, and Westchester, NY; Counties of Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Hunterdon, Ocean,
Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Passaic, Somerset, Sussex, and Union, NJ; Pike County, PA.
Counties of Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester, NJ; Counties of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Philadelphia, PA; New Castle County, DE; Cecil County, MD;
Salem County, NJ.
Collin, Dallas, Delta, Denton, Ellis, Hunt, Kaufman, Rockwall, Johnson, Parker, Tarrant,
and Wise Counties, TX.
Austin, Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, San
Jacinto, and Waller Counties, TX.
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Appendix B to Part 1584—SecuritySensitive Job Functions for Over-theRoad Buses
This table identifies security-sensitive
job functions for owner/operators
regulated under this part. All employees
performing security-sensitive functions
are ‘‘security-sensitive employees’’ for
purposes of this rule and must be
trained.
Categories
Security-sensitive job functions for over-the-road buses
A. Operating a vehicle
B. Inspecting and maintaining vehicles ..............
Employees who have a CDL and operate an OTRB.
Employees who—
1. Perform activities related to the diagnosis, inspection, maintenance, adjustment, repair, or
overhaul of electrical or mechanical equipment relating to vehicles, including functions performed by mechanics and automotive technicians.
2. Does not include cleaning or janitorial activities.
Employees who—
1. Provide cleaning services to areas of facilities owned, operated, or controlled by an owner/
operator regulated under this subchapter that are accessible to the general public or passengers.
2. Provide cleaning services to vehicles owned, operated, or controlled by an owner/operator
regulated under this part (does not include vehicle maintenance).
3. Provide general building maintenance services to buildings owned, operated, or controlled
by an owner/operator regulated under this part.
Employees who—
1. Dispatch, report, transport, receive or deliver orders pertaining to specific vehicles, coordination of transportation schedules, tracking of vehicles and equipment.
2. Manage day-to-day delivery of transportation services and the prevention of, response to,
and redress of disruptions to these services.
3. Perform tasks requiring access to or knowledge of specific route information.
Employees who patrol and inspect property of an owner/operator regulated under this part to
protect the property, personnel, passengers and/or cargo.
Employees who load, or oversee loading of, property tendered by or on behalf of a passenger
on or off of a portion of a bus that will be inaccessible to the passenger while the vehicle is
in operation.
Employees who—
1. Provide services to passengers on-board a bus, including collecting tickets or cash for
fares, providing information, and other similar services.
2. Includes food or beverage employees, tour guides, and functions on behalf of an owner/operator regulated under this part that require regular interaction with travelling public within a
transportation facility, such as ticket agents.
1. Employees who serve as security coordinators designated in § 1570.201 of this subchapter,
as well as any designated alternates or secondary security coordinators.
2. Employees who—
a. Conduct training and testing of employees when the training or testing is required by TSA’s
security regulations.
b. Manage or direct implementation of security plan requirements.
C. Inspecting or maintaining building or transportation infrastructure.
D. Controlling dispatch or movement of a vehicle.
E. Providing security of the owner/operator’s
equipment and property.
F. Loading or unloading cargo or baggage ........
G. Interacting with travelling public (on board a
vehicle or within a transportation facility).
H. Complying with security programs or measures, including those required by Federal law.
Dated: February 28, 2020.
David P. Pekoske,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020–05126 Filed 3–20–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–05–P
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
16517
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:33 Mar 20, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\23MRR2.SGM
23MRR2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 56 (Monday, March 23, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16456-16517]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05126]
[[Page 16455]]
Vol. 85
Monday,
No. 56
March 23, 2020
Part II
Department of Homeland Security
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Transportation Security Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
49 CFR Parts 1500, 1520, et al.
Security Training for Surface Transportation Employees; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85 , No. 56 / Monday, March 23, 2020 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 16456]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
49 CFR Parts 1500, 1520, 1570, 1580, 1582, and 1584
[Docket No. TSA-2015-0001]
RIN 1652-AA55
Security Training for Surface Transportation Employees
AGENCY: Transportation Security Administration, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is requiring
owner/operators of higher-risk freight railroad carriers, public
transportation agencies (including rail mass transit and bus systems),
passenger railroad carriers, and over-the-road bus companies, to
provide TSA-approved security training to employees performing
security-sensitive functions. The training curriculum must teach
employees how to observe, assess, and respond to terrorist-related
threats and/or incidents. Additionally, TSA is expanding its
requirements for security coordinators and reporting of significant
security concerns (currently limited to rail operations) to include bus
operations within the scope of the regulation's applicability. TSA is
amending other provisions of its regulations, as necessary, to
implement these requirements.
DATES:
Effective date: This rule is effective June 22, 2020.
Compliance date: In general, compliance schedules are indicated in
this rule. The requirements in 49 CFR 1570.201 must be met no later
than July 29, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry Schultz (TSA, Security Policy
and Industry Engagement, Surface Division) or David Kasminoff (TSA,
Senior Counsel, Regulations and Security Standards) at telephone (571)
227-5563, or email to [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Rulemaking Document
An electronic copy can be obtained using the internet by--
(1) Searching the electronic Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) web page at https://www.regulations.gov;
(2) Accessing the Government Printing Office's web page at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=FR to view
the daily published Federal Register edition; or accessing the ``Search
the Federal Register by Citation'' in the ``Related Resources'' column
on the left, if you need to do a Simple or Advanced search for
information, such as a type of document that crosses multiple agencies
or dates.
In addition, copies are available by writing or calling the
individual in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Make sure to
identify the docket number of this rulemaking.
Small Entity Inquiries
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires TSA to comply with small entity requests for information
and advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within TSA's
jurisdiction.\1\ Any small entity that has a question regarding this
document may contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. Persons can obtain further information regarding
SBREFA on the Small Business Administration's web page at https://www.sba.gov/category/advocacy-navigation-structure/regulatory-policy/regulatory-flexibility-act/sbrefa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 857 (Mar. 29, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations and Terms Used in This Document
Amtrak--National Railroad Passenger Corporation
APTA--American Public Transportation Association
CDL--Commercial Driver's License
DHS--Department of Homeland Security
DOT--Department of Transportation
FRA--Federal Railroad Administration
FTA--Federal Transit Administration
GAO--U.S. Government Accountability Office
HSA--Homeland Security Act of 2002
HTUA--High Threat Urban Area
IED--Improvised Explosive Device
MOU--Memorandum of Understanding
NSI--Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative
OMB--Office of Management and Budget
OSHA--Occupational Health and Safety Administration
OTRB--Over-the-Road Bus
PHMSA--Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
PRA--Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
PTPR--Public Transportation and Passenger Railroads
RFA--Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
RIA--Regulatory Impact Analysis
RSC--Rail Security Coordinator
RSSM--Rail Security-Sensitive Material
SBA--Small Business Administration
SBREFA--Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
SSI--Sensitive Security Information
TSA--Transportation Security Administration
TSSM--Transportation Security-Sensitive Material
UASI--Urban Area Security Initiative
UMRA--Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
VBIED--Vehicle-Borne Improvised Explosive Device
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary and Background
A. Statutory Mandate
B. Benefits of Requiring Security Training
C. Costs of This Final Rule
D. Organization of This Final Rule
II. Security Program Requirements
A. Who must provide security training?
1. Freight Railroads (Sec. 1580.101)
2. Public Transportation and Passenger Railroads (Sec.
1582.101)
3. Over-the-Road Buses (Sec. 1584.101)
4. Impact on Certain Business Operations
B. Who is responsible for determining whether a specific owner/
operator is subject to the requirements of the rule (applicability
determinations)? (Sec. 1570.105)
C. Which employees must receive security training? (Sec. Sec.
1580.115(a), 1582.115(a) and 1584.115(a))
D. How does an owner/operator determine if someone is a
security-sensitive employee? (Sec. Sec. 1580.3, 1582.3, and 1584.3)
E. Can untrained security-sensitive employees perform security-
sensitive functions? (Sec. Sec. 1580.115(b), 1582.115(b), and
1584.115(b))
F. What topics must be included in the security training?
(Sec. Sec. 1580.115(c)-(f), 1582.115(c)-(f), and 1584.115(c)-(f))
G. Who will provide the security training curriculum?
(Sec. Sec. 1580.113, 1582.113, and 1584.113)?
H. Can owner/operators use pre-existing material or other third-
party material? (Sec. 1570.103)
I. How do these requirements relate to other security training
required by other Federal or State agencies? (Sec. Sec.
1580.115(c), 1582.115(c), and 1584.115(c))
J. What is the required schedule for providing training? (Sec.
1570.111)
1. Initial Training (Sec. 1570.111(a))
2. Recurrent Training (Sec. 1570.111(b))
3. Previous Training (Sec. 1570.107)
K. Do employees have to pass a test? ((Sec. Sec.
1580.113(b)(9), 1582.113(b)(9), and 1584.113(b)(9))
III. Operational Requirements (Subpart D)
A. Security Coordinator Requirements (Sec. 1570.201)
B. Requirement To Report Security Concerns (Sec. 1570.203)
C. Methods for Reporting Information and Substance of
Information Provided (Sec. 1570.203 (a) and (c))
IV. Security Program Procedures
A. Deadlines Related to Submission and Approval of Security
Training Program
B. Amendments
1. Amendments Initiated by Owner/Operator (Sec. 1570.113)
2. Amendments Initiated by TSA (Sec. 1570.115)
[[Page 16457]]
C. Alternative Measures (Sec. 1570.117)
D. Petitions for Reconsideration (Sec. 1570.119)
E. Recordkeeping Requirements (Sec. 1570.121)
F. Summary of Deadlines
V. Miscellaneous Changes
A. Amendments to Part 1500
B. Amendments to Part 1503
C. Amendments to Part 1520
D. Amendments to Part 1570
1. Security Responsibilities for Employees and Other Persons
(Sec. 1570.7)
2. Compliance, Inspection, and Enforcement (Sec. 1570.9)
3. ``Covered Person'' (Sec. 1570.305)
VI. Summary of Changes
VII. Response to Comments on NPRM
A. General Comments
1. Need for Rule
2. Cost of Rule
3. Stakeholder Consultation
4. Terms
B. Investigative and Enforcement Procedures
C. Part 1570--General Rules
1. Terms Used in This Subchapter (Sec. 1570.3)
2. Recognition of Prior or Established Security Measures or
Programs (Sec. 1570.7)
3. Submission and Approval (Sec. 1570.109)
4. Implementation Schedule (Sec. 1570.111)
5. Recordkeeping and Availability (Sec. 1570.121)
6. Security Coordinator (Sec. 1570.201)
7. Reporting Significant Security Concerns (Sec. 1570.203)
D. Subpart B--Security Programs
1. Security Training Program General Requirements (Sec. Sec.
1580.113, 1582.113, and 1584.113)
2. Security Training and Knowledge for Security-Sensitive
Employees (Sec. Sec. 1580.115, 1582.115, and 1584.115)
E. Freight Rail Specific Issues
1. Applicability of Security Training Requirements (Sec.
1580.101)
2. Chain of Custody and Control Requirements (Sec. 1580.205)
F. Public Transportation and Passenger Railroad Specific Issues
G. OTRB Specific Issues
1. Definition of Security-Sensitive Employees (Sec. 1584.3 and
Appendix B to Part 1584)
2. Applicability (Sec. 1584.101)
H. Comments Beyond Scope of Rulemaking
VIII. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
B. Economic Impact Analyses
1. Regulatory Impact Analysis Summary
2. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13711 Assessments
3. OMB A-4 Statement
4. Alternatives Considered
5. Regulatory Flexibility Assessment
6. International Trade Impact Assessment
7. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
C. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
D. Environmental Analysis
E. Energy Impact Analysis
I. Executive Summary and Background
A. Statutory Mandate
Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, Congress created TSA
under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) and
established the agency's primary Federal role to enhance security for
all modes of transportation.\2\ The scope of TSA's authority includes
assessing security risks, developing security measures to address
identified risks, and enforcing compliance with these measures.\3\ TSA
also has broad regulatory authority to issue, rescind, and revise
regulations as necessary to carry out its transportation security
functions.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Public Law 107-71, 115 Stat. 597 (Nov. 19, 2001). ATSA
created TSA as a component of the Department of Transportation
(DOT). Section 403(2) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (HSA),
Public Law 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (Nov. 25, 2002), transferred all
functions related to transportation security, including those of the
Secretary of Transportation and the Under Secretary of
Transportation for Security, to the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Pursuant to DHS Delegation Number 7060.2, the Secretary delegated to
the Administrator, subject to the Secretary's guidance and control,
the authority vested in the Secretary with respect to TSA, including
the authority in sec. 403(2) of the HSA.
\3\ See 49 U.S.C. 114, which codified section 101 of ATSA.
\4\ 49 U.S.C. 114(l)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission
Act of 2007 (9/11 Act),\5\ Congress mandated regulations to enhance
surface transportation security through security training of frontline
employees. The mandate includes prescriptive requirements for who must
be trained, what the training must encompass, and how to submit and
obtain approval for a training program.\6\ The 9/11 Act also mandates
regulations requiring higher-risk railroads and over-the-road buses
(OTRBs) to appoint security coordinators.\7\ In addition to
implementing these provisions, this final rule also addresses a mandate
to define Transportation Security-Sensitive Materials.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Public Law 110-53, 121 Stat. 266 (Aug. 3, 2007).
\6\ See secs. 1408, 1517, and 1534 of the 9/11 Act, codified at
6 U.S.C. 1137, 1167, and 1184, respectively.
\7\ See secs. 1512 and 1531 of the 9/11 Act, codified at 6
U.S.C. 1162 and 1181, respectively. TSA addresses 1512(e)(1)(A) and
1531(e)(1)(A) in this rulemaking. TSA intends to address the other
regulatory requirements of these provisions in separate rulemakings.
\8\ See sec. 1501 of the 9/11 Act, codified at 6 U.S.C. 1151.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Benefits of Requiring Security Training
TSA is issuing this rule pursuant to its authority and
responsibility over the security of the nation's transportation
systems. TSA fulfills its transportation security mission in
partnership with its industry and government stakeholders. As noted in
the 2018 National Strategy for Counterterrorism in the United States:
The critical infrastructure of the United States--much of which
is privately owned--provides the essential goods and services that
drive American prosperity. Coordinated efforts are, therefore,
necessary to strengthen and maintain secure and resilient critical
infrastructure and to prepare Americans to respond appropriately
should an attack occur. By integrating and improving preparedness
across all levels of government as well as the private and public
sectors, we will stop terrorists from undermining our security and
prosperity.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See The White House, National Strategy for Counterterorrism
in the United States, at 19 (Oct. 2018), available at https://www.dni.gov/files/NCTC/documents/news_documents/NSCT.pdf (last
accessed Nov. 26, 2018) (National Strategy).
Consistent with this strategy, the purpose of this rule is to
solidify the baseline of security for higher-risk surface
transportation operations by improving and sustaining the preparedness
of surface transportation employees in higher-risk operations,
including their critical capability to observe, assess, and respond to
security risks and potential security breaches within their unique
working environment. In developing this rulemaking, TSA recognizes
private sector capabilities, voluntary initiatives, and other Federal
requirements to raise security within distinct surface transportation
operations. By integrating these efforts, setting a national standard
for surface transportation employee security training, and ensuring
this training is sustained across higher-risk operations, this rule
promotes national security in alignment with the intent of the 9/11 Act
and the National Strategy.
The rule accomplishes this purpose by requiring higher-risk public
transportation systems, railroad carriers (passenger and freight), and
OTRB owner/operators to prepare and train their employees performing
security-sensitive job functions. Through security training, employees
will have the capability to identify, report, and appropriately react
to suspicious activity, suspicious items, dangerous substances, and
security incidents that may be associated with terrorist
reconnaissance, preparation, or action. TSA believes this training may
be the critical point for preventing a terrorist act and mitigating the
consequences.
In order to ensure effective communication regarding threats (both
to regulated parties and from regulated parties), TSA is also expanding
applicability of current requirements for rail operations to have
security coordinators and report security incidents to TSA. With this
rulemaking,
[[Page 16458]]
the applicability for this requirement is expanded to include any
owner/operator required to provide security training. Requiring higher-
risk owner/operators to have security coordinators and report
significant security concerns to TSA will enhance TSA's ability to
recognize trends and communicate directly with individuals within
higher-risk operations that have direct responsibility for security.
C. Costs of This Final Rule
Table 1 identifies TSA's estimates for the overall cost of this
rule.
Table 1--Cost of Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated costs (over 10
years, discounted at 7
percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freight Railroads......................... $25.09 million.
Public Transportation and Passenger 17.12 million.
Railroads (PTPRs).
OTRBs..................................... 8.06 million.
TSA....................................... 2.03 million.
-----------------------------
Total................................. 52.30 million.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Organization of This Final Rule
Subchapter D of chapter XII of title 49, ``Maritime and Surface
Transportation Security'' \10\ (Subchapter D), includes security
program requirements for surface transportation, including the
requirements in this final rule. Before this final rule, Subchapter D
included requirements relevant to two vetting programs (the
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) and Hazmat
Material Endorsement (HME), as well as certain rail security
requirements, including chain of custody for Rail Security-Sensitive
Materials (RSSM), appointment of security coordinators, and reporting
security issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ TSA is modifying the title of this subchapter, changing it
from ``Maritime and Land Transportation Security'' to ``Maritime and
Surface Transportation Security.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule (1) adds requirements for security training for
certain surface transportation owner/operators; (2) expands
applicability of the security coordinator and reporting security issue
requirements to include higher-risk bus operations; and (3) adds other
miscellaneous provisions necessary for implementation of a new
regulatory program.
To incorporate these new elements, TSA is organizing Subchapter D
as follows.
Part 1570 is divided into four subparts: (1) Subpart A
includes requirements generally applicable to all aspects of subchapter
D; (2) subpart B includes security program requirements consistently
relevant to multiple modes; (3) subpart C includes operational
requirements consistently applicable to multiple modes; and (4) subpart
D moves and consolidates general provisions related to security threat
assessments (STAs) which are more specifically addressed in part 1572.
As noted below, mode-specific requirements are contained in subsequent
parts.
Part 1580 is modified to limit requirements applicable to
rail security. This part includes operational requirements unique to
freight railroads and rail hazardous materials shippers/receivers (such
as chain of custody) \11\ and modal-specific security training
requirements for freight railroads. The requirements for appointment of
security coordinators and reporting security issues are moved to part
1570 and several definitions are moved to part 1500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Rail Transportation Security Final Rule (Rail Security
Rule), 73 FR 72130, (Nov. 26, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 1582, a new part entitled ``Public Transportation and
Passenger Railroad Security,'' includes modal-specific security
training requirements for public transportation system and passenger
railroads (PTPR). The requirements for appointment of security
coordinators and reporting security issues applicable to PTPR rail
operations are moved to part 1570 and several definitions are moved to
part 1500.
Part 1584, a new part entitled, ``Highway and Motor
Carrier Security,'' includes modal-specific security training
requirements for OTRB owner/operators.
Owner/operators subject to the requirements of this final rule will
need to address the requirements in part 1570 as well as the
requirements applicable to their respective mode in parts 1582 through
1584. Sections II through IV, which follow, provide a comprehensive
discussion of these requirements as they will be implemented, rather
than a sequential section-by-section analysis. Section II addresses
general programmatic requirements, including: Applicability
determinations, which employees must be trained, content of training,
and the required training schedule. Section III discusses operational
requirements, such as the requirement for security coordinators and
reporting of security incidents. Section IV provides the procedural
requirements for submission and approval of a security training
program, amendments to the program, and recordkeeping requirements.
This section also includes a table that summarizes the compliance
deadlines owner/operators must meet. Section V discusses other
revisions to TSA's regulations that result from adding these new
requirements to Subchapter D.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The discussion does not address provisions that are moved,
as discussed above, but not modified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule includes TSA's responses to comments received on
the NPRM. Section VI includes a chart summarizing the minimal changes
between the NPRM and final rule. Section VII provides TSA's responses
to comments on the NPRM.
Section VIII includes the rulemaking analysis and notices. This
analysis includes any changes in the impact estimates between the NPRM
and the final rule and the basis for those changes.
II. Security Program Requirements
A. Who must provide security training?
Consistent with TSA's commitment to a risk-based approach to
transportation security, the requirements of this rule only apply to
higher-risk operations. A higher-risk operation is one that meets the
criteria in Sec. Sec. 1580.101 (freight railroads), 1582.101 (PTPR),
and 1584.101 (OTRB). These criteria are used to identify operations
with a relatively higher-risk of being targeted or used by terrorists.
While there are approximately 10,000 surface transportation operations,
approximately 300 of them currently meet the criteria.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ A full discussion of TSA's analysis and considerations in
making its determination and developing the applicability criteria
can be found in the NPRM. See 81 FR at 91355 et seq. (section III.F.
of the NPRM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the requirements of this rule are limited to higher-risk
operations, TSA encourages all owner/operators to consider implementing
the security training program required by this rule, modified and
adapted to their operations, as appropriate. TSA will ensure resources
developed for regulated owner/operators, such as TSA-created training
materials, are available to owner/operators of non-higher-risk
operations who are committed to enhancing security through improving
the security awareness of employees.
TSA's applicability criteria for freight railroads, PTPR, OTRB, and
certain business operations are as follows.
1. Freight Railroads (Sec. 1580.101)
A freight railroad owner/operator must provide security training if
it is: (a)
[[Page 16459]]
Designated as Class I; \14\ (b) transports RSSM in one or more of the
areas listed in current Appendix A to 49 CFR part 1580; \15\ and/or (c)
hosts a higher-risk rail operation (including freight railroads and the
intercity or commuter systems identified in Sec. 1582.101). The
flowchart in Figure 1 summarizes when a freight railroad owner/operator
must provide security training and when this training is recommended by
TSA. TSA estimates the requirements of this rule currently apply to 33
freight railroads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The Surface Transportation Board defines a Class I railroad
as one with annual operating revenue in excess of $447,621,226
(adjusted for inflation).
\15\ See Sec. 1580.3 for definition of RSSM.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MR20.000
2. Public Transportation and Passenger Railroads (Sec. 1582.101)
A public transportation agency or passenger railroad must provide
security training if it is (a) one of the 46 identified PTPR systems
listed in 49 CFR part 1582, Appendix A; (b) Amtrak; or (c) hosts a
higher-risk freight railroad. DHS consistently identifies the eight
regions where the 46 systems operate as having the highest transit-
specific risk. Applying the rule's requirements to these systems
corresponds to providing enhanced security for more than 80 percent of
all PTPR passengers.
3. Over-the-Road Buses (Sec. 1584.101)
An OTRB owner/operator must provide security training if it
provides fixed-route service to, through, or from any of ten areas
identified in 49 CFR part 1584, Appendix A. These ten areas receive the
highest funding allocation under the FY 2018 Urban Area Security
Initiative (UASI) grant program (87 percent of the total available
funding).\16\ TSA estimates that this rule will apply to approximately
205 OTRB owner/operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ UASI funds are allocated based on a risk methodology
employed by DHS and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
For the list of UASI allocations for the FY 2018 UASI grant program,
which is administered by FEMA as part of the larger Homeland
Security Grant Program, see the FY 2018 Homeland Security Grant
Program Notice of Funding Opportunity, Appendix A at https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1526578809767-7f08f471f36d22b2c0d8afb848048c96/FY_2018_HSGP_NOFO_FINAL_508.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The determining factor for whether a fixed-route OTRB owner/
operator is within the scope of the rule is not where they are
headquartered, but where they provide service. In deciding to rely on
where the owner/operator provides service, rather than corporate
headquarters locations, TSA considered factors that could make an OTRB
a potential target for a terrorist attack, including (1) its visibility
(the size of its operations); (2) the extent to which its schedule is
publicly available; (3) whether or not it is relatively easy for
unknown individuals to board the bus; (4) and whether the bus will have
ease of access to high-consequence locations.
TSA is aware that some private companies provide commuter services
that may trigger applicability of the rule. Figure 2 provides a
flowchart to assist companies with determining if the security training
requirements apply.
[[Page 16460]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MR20.001
4. Impact on Certain Business Operations
Parent corporations and subsidiaries. While the criteria for
higher-risk determinations presumes similarities for operations within
each mode,\17\ TSA recognizes there are other considerations that could
affect applicability, particularly related to subsidiaries. As
discussed in section III.F of the NPRM,\18\ TSA is limiting the
requirements to the level of the subsidiary whose operations fit the
applicability criteria identified in the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See discussion on applicability at 81 FR 91355 et seq.
(sec. III.F. of NPRM).
\18\ 81 FR at 91355.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the review and approval process of the security training
program, TSA will work with owner/operators to address any compliance
issues based on corporate structure. For example, owner/operator A may
be organized to make each regional area a separate subsidiary. As such,
only the subsidiary that meets the applicability requirements must
develop a security training program. Owner/operator B may be a single
entity for purposes of corporate-legal structure with branches, rather
than subsidiaries, providing service on specific routes. Under this
rule, the entire corporation is subject to the requirements based on
the operations of one route. In this situation, owner/operator B could
choose to submit a proposed alternative to limit application of the
requirements to branches and a handful of headquarters or other
regional employees that provide operational support. The submission
requirements and procedures for requesting alternative measures are
discussed in section IV.
Foreign owner/operators. While the applicability provisions for
security training do not specifically reference foreign owner/
operators, the requirements apply to employees performing a security-
sensitive function ``. . . in the United States or in direct support of
the common carriage of persons or property between a place in the
United States and any place outside the United States.'' Therefore, the
training requirements of this rule apply to both domestic owner/
operators and foreign owner/operators with employees performing covered
functions within the United States or in support of operations within
the United States. For example, the rule may apply to a Canadian OTRB
owner/operator offering fixed-route service that begins at a point in
Canada and transits through an area identified in part 1584, Appendix A
before concluding at a point in Mexico. Even if only one employee (for
example, the driver), performs a security-sensitive function while
physically in the United States, applicability is triggered by the
route. The Canadian OTRB owner/operator would be required to have a
security training program and provide the required training to the
driver and any other employee performing a security-sensitive function
that supports the operations transiting through higher-risk regions in
the United States (such as individuals providing maintenance or
inspection services and dispatch information applicable to the covered
route). Once applicability is triggered, it is irrelevant where the
OTRB owner/operator's company is located or where the function is being
performed (whether the employee is performing the security-sensitive
function at a location in Canada or along the route in the United
States).
In addition, while foreign owner/operators providing service in the
United States are required to have a security coordinator and
alternate, foreign owner/operators are only required to report
potential threats and significant security concerns for operations in
the United States or transportation to, from, or within the United
States. A similar requirement currently applies to foreign freight
railroad owner/operators under 49 CFR part 1580. This approach is also
consistent with that taken by the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA).
Hosting relationships. TSA recognizes that joint operations are
common within the rail industry and include agreements
[[Page 16461]]
such as hosting. In a hosting relationship, the ``host railroad'' owns
the track and exercises operational control of the movement of trains
of other railroads (the ``tenant'' railroads) while they are using that
track.
Under this rule, both the host and tenant railroads are required to
have a training program that appropriately addresses the ramifications
of the hosting relationship. For example, the host railroad's training
program will need to address the operational considerations of the
hosting relationship, such as training dispatchers on their role and
responsibilities in halting the tenant railroad's operations over a
segment of track where there is a potential threat (such as a suspected
improvised explosive device (IED) or tampering with infrastructure).
Similarly, a tenant railroad subject to the security training
requirements of 49 CFR part 1582 (PTPR), will need to address the
operational considerations of the hosting relationship, such as
instructing its train and engine employees on the proper communication
procedures to follow when a potential threat is identified. Under
either example, the host and tenant railroad owner/operators are only
responsible for training their own employees.
Contracted services. Contracted services may involve joint
operation pursuant to specific terms, but are different from hosting
relationships. For example, some commuter passenger train services are
owned by public transportation agencies, but the agency has a contract
with a private company (such as a freight railroad) to operate the
train. This is not a hosting relationship.
When inspecting compliance by participants in this type of a
contracted services agreement, TSA will consider the freight railroad
carrier (the private company/contractor) to be an authorized
representative of the PTPR owner/operator (the owner/operator of the
passenger train service). TSA will hold the PTPR owner/operator
primarily responsible for compliance and for ensuring that all
security-sensitive employees receive the required training, whether
they are employed directly by the PTPR owner/operator or contractor.
The PTPR owner/operator must train the freight railroad carrier's
employees performing security-sensitive functions related to the
passenger train service.
To the extent the contract between the PTPR owner/operator and the
freight railroad includes a provision for the freight railroad to train
its own employees, the passenger operation is responsible for
documenting satisfaction of the training requirements within its TSA-
approved-security training program. TSA will expect the passenger
operation to clearly state in its security training program, as part of
the submission process under 49 CFR 1570.109, that the freight railroad
carrier will conduct the training and provide the required information
on that training.
Regardless of how the parties define who will do what, TSA has
authority to inspect both parties' operations for compliance. The
regulated party is primarily responsible, but TSA has authority to
initiate enforcement actions for non-compliance against either party
based upon a fact-specific determination. While TSA historically
initiates enforcement actions against the regulated entity, we have
begun to look more closely at authorized representative/contractual
relationships in our effort to address the root cause of noncompliance.
B. Who is responsible for determining whether a specific owner/operator
is subject to the requirements of the rule (applicability
determinations)? (Sec. 1570.105)
Owner/operators are required to use the criteria in 49 CFR parts
1580, 1582, and 1584 (contained in a subpart B to each part) to
determine whether their operations are higher-risk. If the operations
meet the criteria, the requirements of this rule apply. Under Sec.
1570.105(a), owner/operators must notify TSA within 30 days of the
effective date of this final rule if they meet the criteria for
applicability. This obligation also applies to new and modified
operations (commencing after publication of the final rule). Under
Sec. 1570.105(b), owner/operators must notify TSA no later than 90
calendar days before commencing operations or implementing
modifications triggering applicability of the requirements.
While the rule requires owner/operators to determine whether the
criteria apply, TSA is aware of the operations that are likely to be
within the scope of applicability. TSA may initiate a compliance
investigation if an owner/operator fails to self-identify within the
required period.
To mitigate the likelihood of an owner/operator failing to comply
based upon lack of recognition of the applicability for these
requirements, TSA will use a variety of communication strategies to
notify regulated parties that are likely to meet the applicability
criteria. For example, TSA will use email to immediately notify its key
stakeholder points of contact regarding publication of this final rule.
In addition to these established information sharing mechanisms, TSA
also conducts regular calls, workshops, and meetings with major
industry partners and trade associations. TSA's surface representatives
also work closely with surface-system owner/operators during industry-
led security work groups, conferences, roundtables, and other sector-
specific government coordination meetings. TSA plans to use all of
these mechanisms to notify relevant industry partners of the new
requirements.
C. Which employees must receive security training? (Sec. Sec.
1580.115(a), 1582.115(a) and 1584.115(a))
Any owner/operator required to have a security training program
under Sec. Sec. 1580.101, 1582.101, or 1584.101, must provide security
training to all security-sensitive employees. Security-sensitive
employees include any direct employee, contractor, employee of a
contractor, or other authorized person who is compensated for
performing a security-sensitive function on behalf of or for the
benefit of the owner/operator.\19\ For example, if an OTRB owner/
operator does not employ any drivers directly, but uses drivers under
contract, these drivers will need to be trained. Similarly, if an
owner/operator has chosen to combine dispatch services with any
affiliates of its parent corporation, the owner/operator required to
provide security training to its direct employees will also be required
to provide security training to any dispatchers providing services for
its fleet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Sec. 1570.3 for the definition of an ``employee.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. How does an owner/operator determine if someone is a security-
sensitive employee? (Sec. Sec. 1580.3, 1582.3, and 1584.3)
Definitions of mode-specific ``security-sensitive employees'' are
included in Sec. Sec. 1580.3 (freight rail), 1582.3 (PTPR), and 1584.3
(OTRB), with additional detail regarding job functions provided in
mode-specific tables published as appendices to parts 1580,\20\ 1582,
and 1584. As discussed in section III.E. of the NPRM, ``security-
sensitive employees'' are individuals who perform functions with a
direct nexus to, or impact on, transportation
[[Page 16462]]
security.\21\ These functions fall into the following categories: (1)
Operating a vehicle; inspecting and maintaining vehicles; (2)
inspecting or maintaining building or transportation infrastructure;
(3) controlling dispatch or movement of vehicles; (4) providing
security of the owner/operator's equipment and property; (5) loading or
unloading cargo or baggage; (6) interacting with travelling public (on
board a vehicle or within a transportation facility); and (7) complying
with security programs or measures, including those required by Federal
law (a catch-all category that includes a small number of employees
such as security coordinators and any other individuals who may have
responsibility for carrying out aspects of the owner/operator's
security program or other security measures who are not otherwise
identified in the previous categories).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The table in part 1580 Appendix B is unique in that it
includes examples of the job titles related to these functions based
on historic use of these terms for railroads. The job titles,
however, are provided solely as a resource to help understand the
functions described; whether an employee must be trained is based
upon the function, not the job title.
\21\ See 81 FR at 91353 et seq. for more information on how TSA
identifies these employees and how the chosen functions align with
requirements in the 9/11 Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The requirements also apply to managers, supervisors, or others who
perform a security-sensitive function or who so directly supervise the
performance of such a function that their nexus is equivalent to the
security-sensitive employee.\22\ For example, a yardmaster in freight
railroad operations is considered a security-sensitive employee because
he or she directs security-sensitive functions, even if not in the
direct management chain of all individuals performing these functions.
At the same time, individuals within a corporate structure who neither
perform a security-sensitive function nor have direct management
responsibilities over individuals who do are unlikely to have a
position within the corporation with a significant nexus to the
transportation operations of the business (such as accounting
functions). To the extent there are such individuals in the management
structure, they will not be considered ``security-sensitive''
employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ The definition of ``employee,'' which is in Sec. 1570.3,
includes immediate supervisors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In some circumstances, security-sensitive functions may be
performed by individuals not within the definition of ``employee.'' For
example, police officers employed by a local law enforcement agency may
be routinely patrolling the owner/operator's premises and/or
operations, but do not work directly for, or under contract to, the
owner/operator. Owner/operators are not required to provide training to
these individuals. To the extent, however, these individuals work in
the same environment as security-sensitive employees, TSA encourages
owner/operators to make their training materials and sessions
available. Providing awareness of training content to local law
enforcement personnel regularly assigned to patrols at locations where
security-sensitive employees work can enhance communication and
cooperation in response to potential threats or actual terrorist-
related incidents.
The law enforcement agency or personnel may be considered security-
sensitive employees of the owner/operator if, for example, there is a
contractual relationship for the law enforcement agency to provide
services to the owner/operator and the law enforcement officer is
assigned to that location by the owner/operator. Similarly, where the
owner/operator has a dedicated police or security force who are
employees of the owner/operator, these individuals are security-
sensitive employees who must be trained under this rule.
TSA encourages owner/operators to consider other employees within
their corporate structure or business operations who may not be
performing a security-sensitive function as identified in the rule, but
who could provide an additional layer of security if they received
security training. Furthermore, if an owner/operator identifies
positions or functions not listed by TSA as security-sensitive, but
which have the nexus to transportation security that is intended to be
covered by the rule, TSA encourages the owner/operator to identify and
include these employees within its security training program.
E. Can untrained security-sensitive employees perform security-
sensitive functions? (Sec. Sec. 1580.115(b), 1582.115(b), and
1584.115(b))
If a security-sensitive employee does not receive the required
security training, this employee is prohibited from performing a
security-sensitive function without the direct supervision of an
employee who has met the training requirements applicable to that
security-sensitive function. While TSA is not defining ``direct,'' TSA
expects the supervisor to be located in reasonable proximity to the
employee to supervise actions and provide the necessary level of
security awareness and response capabilities.
Furthermore, even if an employee is directly supervised, TSA
imposes a 60-day limit for the amount of time that an employee may
perform a security-sensitive function without completing the required
training. After 60 days, the rule requires the owner/operator to remove
the employee from a security-sensitive function. This requirement does
not affect the owner/operators' discretion to reassign the individual
to other non-security-sensitive job functions.
F. What topics must be included in the security training? (Sec. Sec.
1580.115(c)-(f), 1582.115(c)-(f), and 1584.115(c)-(f))
TSA is requiring a training program that focuses on the specific
knowledge provided to security-sensitive employees related to
preparedness, observation, assessment and response. As a key aspect of
security awareness is the ability to detect anomalies in the operating
environment, the rule affords flexibility for owner/operators to
develop and implement a program that addresses the above-required
components in the context of their unique operational environments.
The ``prepare'' category addresses training on discharging any
security responsibilities that security-sensitive employees may have
under an owner/operator's existing security plan or security measure.
This rule does not require any owner/operator to adopt or implement a
security plan or measures, but TSA is aware that many owner/operators
have security plans or measures implemented to comply with Federal
requirements, to qualify for Federal grants, or as the result of
voluntary initiatives. To the extent these plans or procedures exist,
employees must be trained in order to ensure they are effective.
Similar to the threat and incident prevention and response training,
this portion of the training program will need to be tailored to the
specific operation.
The ``prepare'' element provides multiple benefits to
transportation security and to owner/operators. First, the requirement
recognizes that the time when a crisis is occurring is not the time to
provide training on how to implement crisis-response measures.
Employees need to be prepared in advance, especially if they have
responsibilities related to responding to a terrorist incident in order
to mitigate the consequences. Second, this training element ensures
that training conducted under this rule meets all of the requirements
for security training required for ``hazmat employees'' under 49 CFR
172.704(a)(5).\23\ Third, this
[[Page 16463]]
element also captures specific training for freight railroads related
to the requirements in Sec. 1580.115(c) for chain of custody and
control requirements, ensuring appropriate procedures are followed to
comply with the security requirements in subpart C to part 1580 (which
contains the requirements moved from Sec. Sec. 1580.103 and 1580.107
as a result of this rulemaking).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ An analysis of the relationship between the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) required training
and the training provided by this final rule can be found in Diagram
B of the NPRM. See 81 FR at 91364. The relation with other training
is also discussed in section II.H. and I. of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the ``prepare'' category captures training that may vary
based on the specific nature of an employee's responsibilities. For
example, appropriate methods of self-defense may vary based upon an
employee's job and extent to which he or she interacts with the public.
Similarly, an employee's need to be trained in how to operate and
maintain security equipment may be dictated by the employee's
responsibilities. Within this category, owner/operators have some
flexibility to shape the training to be appropriate for their specific
employees and operations. This flexibility allows owner/operators to
avoid situations where employees are required to sit through training
completely irrelevant to their roles and responsibilities.
TSA intends for the training required in the Observe, Assess, and
Respond categories to be relevant to all employees, regardless of their
job functions. Training in security awareness and behavior recognition
is appropriate for all employees and TSA believes there should be a
common level of proficiency on these issues among security-sensitive
employees of the owner/operators.
The ``observe'' category is intended to provide knowledge to
increase a security-sensitive employee's observational skills. In
general, this training focuses on recognizing the difference between
what is normal for the operational environment and abnormalities that
could indicate terrorist planning or imminent attack. Training
delivered should teach the employees that suspicious activity is a
combination of actions and individual behaviors that appear strange,
inconsistent, or out of the ordinary for the employee's work
environment. In most instances, it will not be a single factor, but a
combination of factors taking place at a particular time and place,
that will accurately identify a suspicious individual or act.
The ``assess'' category requires providing knowledge of how to
determine the most appropriate response to what is observed. For
example, does the incident require a response and, if so, what is the
appropriate response?
The ``respond'' category includes training on security incident
responses--including how to appropriately report a security threat,
interact with the public and first responders at the scene of a threat
or incident, applicable uses of self-defense devices or protective
equipment, and communication with passengers. In addition to meeting
training requirements enumerated in the 9/11 Act,\24\ this category is
intended to provide elements of security awareness training required by
49 CFR 172.704(a)(4). To the extent owner/operators need to provide
training on specific self-defense devices or protective equipment, TSA
has not calculated these costs. Such training is not a cost of this
rule based on an assumption that training on the use of self-defense
devices and equipment is a standard part of any operation before
providing such devices or equipment to individuals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Diagram B in the NPRM, Development Considerations for
Requirements in Sec. Sec. 1580.113, 1582.113, and 1584.11, provides
an analysis of the 9/11 Act's requirements and other considerations
incorporated into the four categories of training required by this
rule. See 81 FR at 91364.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA recognizes that owner/operators may choose, or have chosen, to
integrate varying levels of training into their security training
programs, such as for particular categories of employees or job
functions, to meet the objectives of their overall security program or
plan. As noted in section I, TSA intends for this rule to establish and
solidify the baseline of security for higher-risk surface
transportation operations. To the extent an owner/operator has a
program that goes beyond the required baseline, TSA encourages
continuation of these efforts as long as the owner/operator can meet
the minimum training required by this rule for all security-sensitive
employees.
G. Who will provide the security training curriculum? (Sec. Sec.
1580.113, 1582.113, and 1584.113)?
Owner/operators are required to train security-sensitive employees
using curriculum approved by TSA. TSA assumes that many of the owner/
operators required to provide security training under this rule already
have training programs in place that may substantially comply with the
rule's requirements. This assumption is based on TSA's involvement in
allocations of grant funding to owner/operators for the development of
security training materials, funded through various DHS-grant program
appropriations, as well as a comprehensive review of available training
materials to determine whether they meet the standards and criteria
required by the 9/11 Act. This assumption is also bolstered by certain
industry responses to TSA's Notice published in 2013 in which TSA
sought public comment and data on current security training
practices.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Request for Comments on Security Training Programs for
Surface Mode Employees, 78 FR 35945, 35948 (June 14, 2013)
(discussion on grant-funded training programs under ``Relation to
Other Training Programs''). TSA summarizes the response to the 2013
Notice in this final rule's RIA, Section 1.5. TSA explains in
Sections 1.8.2. and 1.8.3. of the RIA how it used information from
the responses to the 2013 Notice to assess the level of training in
the baseline for PTPR and OTRB owner/operators, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA is committed to mitigating the costs of training for all owner/
operators through several initiatives. For example, TSA has, and will
continue, to identify existing training materials that address the
curriculum content requirements identified in the rule and will make
this information available to regulated parties.\26\ TSA is also
developing training materials that meet specific training requirements
in this rule. TSA will notify regulated parties as the relevant
training materials are completed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See, e.g., Example of Security Training Matrix (TSA-2013-
0005-0084) available in the docket to this rulemaking at
www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Can owner/operators use pre-existing material or other third-party
material? (Sec. 1570.103)
This rule does not require the owner/operator to create their own
material or impose limits on the use of third-party material. If,
however, owner/operators choose to rely on previously prepared training
material, including material developed to satisfy other regulatory
requirements, or third-party material, they must incorporate that
material into an appendix to their security training program and
reference that appendix in the corresponding portions of their security
program, as discussed below.
I. How do these requirements relate to other security training required
by other Federal or State agencies? (Sec. Sec. 1580.115(c),
1582.115(c), and 1584.115(c))
TSA recognizes that many owner/operators covered by this rule are
subject to training requirements under regulations of the Department of
Transportation (DOT) that overlap with the training content required in
the 9/11 Act.\27\ TSA does not expect owner/operators to duplicate
training. To the extent that an owner/operator intends to use existing
training programs
[[Page 16464]]
implemented to comply with other Federal requirements or other
standards in order to satisfy some or all of the requirements of this
rule, the program submitted to TSA for approval must identify how the
owner/operators intends to use the other training to satisfy TSA's
requirements, such as the curriculum or lesson plan for that program.
TSA intends to maintain an iterative list available to regulated owner/
operators of training programs that have been approved by TSA for use
in meeting this rule's requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See sections III.G.5 and I of NPRM for a discussion of
other related training. 81 FR at 91361-91362 and 91364 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph (c)(2) requires an index to be provided if the owner/
operator chooses to submit all or part of an existing security training
program to TSA for approval. The index must be organized in the same
sequence as the content requirements in Sec. Sec. 1580.115, 1582.115,
and 1584.115. Indexing is a necessary requirement if TSA is to provide
flexibility for owner/operators to use existing training programs to
satisfy this rule. TSA may request additional information on the
program through the review and approval process.
J. What is the required schedule for providing training? (Sec.
1570.111)
1. Initial Training (Sec. 1570.111(a))
Current employees must be trained within one year of TSA's approval
of the security training program. Initial training for new employees or
those transitioning to a covered job function (as identified in
Appendix B to parts 1580 (freight rail), 1582 (PTPR), and 1584 (OTRB)),
must occur within the first 60 days of the date an employee begins to
perform a security-sensitive function. In general, this means that an
employee must be trained within 60 days of starting in a permanent-
employment position that may require performance of a security-
sensitive function, whether full or part-time.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ These deadlines are set by secs. 1408(d)(3), 1517(d)(3),
1534(d)3 of the 9/11 Act, codified at 6 U.S.C. 1137, 1167, and 1184.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1570.111(a)(3) addresses non-permanent employees. Non-
permanent employees must receive training within 60 calendar days after
employment that meets the definition of a security-sensitive employee.
If an individual is employed on an intermittent or non-permanent basis,
such as a contractor hired to perform a security-sensitive function for
short durations, then the training must take place before the
individual's aggregated length of employment by the owner/operator
equals 60 calendar days within a consecutive twelve-month period.
Training is not required if an individual is employed to perform a
security-sensitive function one time for less than 60 days. Training is
required if an individual performs a security-sensitive function for
short but repeated durations and the aggregated period of time equals
60 days. TSA recognizes that some owner/operators may choose to train
all regular contractors or other individuals employed for short but
regular durations rather than having to monitor aggregated days of
employment.
In meeting the initial training schedule, TSA expects that many
owner/operators will rely on the provisions in Sec. 1570.107, which
provide standards for accepting previous training. TSA may allow
``training credit'' to be given for employees who received equivalent
security training within one year before the rule's effective date.
This training credit may include the following:
Training on emergency preparedness plans that railroads
connected with the operation of passenger trains must implement to
address subjects such as communication, employee training and
qualification, joint operations, tunnel safety, liaison with emergency
responders, on-board emergency equipment, and passenger safety
information.
Training on policies that public transportation agencies
implement to ensure safety promotion to support the execution of the
Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan required under 49 CFR part 673
for all employees, agents, and contractors of any State, local
government authority, or other operator of a public transportation
system that receives Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 53.
Training provided through funds granted under the Transit
Security Grant Program or other grant programs.
The recordkeeping provisions, discussed below, require an owner/
operator to provide current and former employees with documentation
upon request of any training completed to meet the requirements of this
rule. Options for compliance with this requirement could include
providing employees with certificates to validate completed training.
Providing employees with documentation of training is particularly
relevant for operations such as those in the OTRB industry, where
employees (for example, commercial drivers) may work for multiple
owner/operators. If an owner/operator can validate an employee has
received the required training within the specified timeframe, the
training does not need to be repeated. Because of its obligation to
ensure all training requirements are met, the current owner/operator is
responsible for ensuring that any previous training courses satisfy the
rule's requirements and documenting that the training was received
within the required timeframe.
Finally, there may be situations where ``dual-hatted'' or other
specific-function employees are required to receive security training
from other sources as part of their jobs, such as railroad police
officers employed by the owner/operator. As indicated above, it is the
obligation of the owner/operator to ensure and document the training,
including training received under these circumstances.
2. Recurrent Training (Sec. 1570.111(b))
TSA believes regular recurrent training is essential for
transportation employees to maintain a high level of awareness and
competency. To ensure this need is met, this rule requires owner/
operators to provide the TSA-approved security training curriculum to
their security-sensitive employees at least once every three years.
This frequency is consistent with the requirements for security
training imposed by the Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety
Administration (PHMSA) for hazardous materials employees under 49 CFR
part 172.
In addition, consistent with 49 CFR 172.704, if the owner/operator
modifies a security program or security plan for which training is
required under this rule, the owner/operator must ensure that each
security-sensitive employee with position- or function-specific
responsibilities related to the revised plan or program changes
receives training on the revisions within 90 days of implementation of
the revised plan or program changes. This requirement ensures employees
responsible for implementing the security program or plan will be
trained in a timely manner concerning any changes or revisions to the
security plan or program as necessary to reflect changes in security
affecting their specific operating environment or the surface
transportation system.
3. Previous Training (Sec. 1570.107)
While there is no specific requirement in the 9/11 Act for TSA to
allow use of existing training programs to satisfy the security
training regulatory requirements, this rule provides an opportunity for
owner/operators to seek recognition of previously provided training.
Under Sec. 1570.107, an owner/operator may rely on previous training
that occurred within the identified periods for initial or recurrent
training.
[[Page 16465]]
In order to use previous training, the owner/operator must validate
that the previous training satisfies the requirements of this rule (for
example, reviewing records of training and curriculum), is relevant to
the employee's job function, and appropriate for owner/operator's
operations. As part of its inspection and compliance authority, TSA may
require the owner/operator to provide the documentation used to
determine the previous training met the requirements of this rule.
K. Do employees have to pass a test? ((Sec. Sec. 1580.113(b)(9),
1582.113(b)(9), and 1584.113(b)(9))
TSA is not requiring security training programs to include employee
testing, with prescribed pass/fail rates. The security training
programs submitted to TSA, however, must include how the owner/operator
will measure the effectiveness of the training program. TSA will afford
flexibility to each individual owner/operator to identify measures for
determining the effectiveness of their security training program using
methods and criteria appropriate for their operations. For example, TSA
expects that some owner/operators will choose to administer a written
test or evaluation to gauge their employees' level of knowledge in
order to assess the overall effectiveness of training, while others may
rely upon operational tests conducted by supervisors to determine
whether employees are being trained effectively. Some may use the
results of drills and exercises to measure effectiveness and identify
areas where modifications are needed.
Similarly, TSA is not prescribing conditions for a pass/fail policy
that may be associated with post-training testing. While individual
companies may elect to enforce pass/fail criteria with associated
personnel actions, TSA is neither requiring nor recommending a
specified maximum number of times that an individual may take a test or
evaluation to demonstrate knowledge and competency. As previously
noted, however, the methods submitted by an owner/operator for
determining training efficacy may affect TSA's approval of any
alternative measures for compliance. In reviewing security training
programs, TSA's focus is on whether the program includes measures for
the effectiveness of the training program, not an individual employee's
performance.
III. Operational Requirements (Subpart D)
TSA requires freight and passenger railroad carriers, rail transit
systems, rail hazardous materials shippers, and certain rail hazardous
materials receivers, to appoint ``rail security coordinators'' \29\
(RSCs) and report significant security concerns to TSA.\30\ The RSCs
are security liaisons to TSA, providing a single point of contact for
receiving communications and inquiries from TSA concerning threat
information or security procedures, and coordinating responses with
appropriate law enforcement and emergency response agencies. This
information, reported to TSA from the frontline of rail operations, is
consolidated and analyzed by TSA to identify developing threats and
trend analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ These requirements were promulgated in 2008, see supra n.
8, codified at 49 CFR 1580.101 and 1580.201 (before changes made by
this rule).
\30\ See id. at 49 CFR 1580.105 and 1580.203 (before changes
made by this rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA is expanding applicability of these requirements to the owner/
operators subject to the security training requirements. As a result,
the scope of the requirement applies to:
All rail operations subject to the security coordinator
and reporting requirements under previous 1580.101, 1580.105, 1580.201,
and 1580.203 (now located in sections 1570.201 and 1570.203);
Any bus operations of a public transportation owner/
operator required to provide security training under this rule; and
Any OTRB owner/operator required to provide security
training under this rule.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ As previously noted, TSA currently requires security
coordinators for rail operations, including freight railroads,
passenger railroads, and public transportation rail operations. In
addition to mandating security coordinators for railroads, the 9/11
Act also requires security coordinators for bus operations. See 9/11
Act sec. 1531, codified at 6 U.S.C. 1181(e)(1)(A) (``Identification
of a security coordinator having authority--(i) to implement
security actions under the plan; (ii) to coordinate security
improvements; (iii) to receive immediate communications from
appropriate Federal officials regarding over-the-road bus
security''). See 9/11 Act sec. 1512, codified at 6 U.S.C.
1162(e)(1)(A). For a similar provision applicable to railroads.
Consistent with this mandate, TSA is extending the requirement to
appoint a primary and at least one alternate security coordinator
for OTRB companies and bus operations of PTPR owner/operators
identified as higher-risk through this rulemaking. This will have a
limited impact on the PTPR mode as most public transportation bus
agencies covered by this rule are part of a larger system that is
already required to have a security coordinator under current 49 CFR
part 1580. See sec. III.D.4 of the NPRM for more discussion
regarding the security coordinator and reporting requirements (81 FR
at 91350 et seq.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As proposed in the NPRM, the rule text for applicability of the
security coordinator requirements erroneously included all bus-only
public transportation systems, TSA intended, however, to limit
applicability to the bus-only public transportation systems within the
scope of the security training requirements, that is, the higher-risk
bus-only systems.\32\ To be consistent with TSA's intent as explained
above and in the preamble of the NPRM, TSA is clarifying the
requirement in the final rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See 81 FR at 91350: ``Because of the benefits of [the
security coordinator and reporting requirements] to transportation
security, TSA is proposing to extend these requirements to the modes
of transportation covered by this proposed rule that are not
currently subject to the requirements of 49 CFR part 1580. . . . TSA
proposes to extend the requirement to appoint a primary and at least
one alternate security coordinator for OTRB companies and the bus
operations of PTPR owner/operators (with a limited impact as most
public transportation bus agencies are part of a larger system that
is required to have a security coordinator under current 49 CFR part
1580).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2 compares applicability scope of the previous requirement
with the expanded applicability. The cost estimate for this requirement
in the NPRM is consistent with TSA's intent and the corrected rule
text.
Table 2--Comparison of Applicability for Security Coordinator and
Reporting Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Previous Sec.
Sec. New Sec.
1580.101/103 Sec.
and 1580.201/ 1570.201/203
203
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freight railroad carriers............... X X
Rail hazardous materials shippers....... X X
Rail hazardous materials receivers in X X
High Threat Urban Areas (HTUAs)........
Owner/operators of private rail cars*... X X
Railroads hosting freight or PTPR rail X X
operations.............................
[[Page 16466]]
PTPR operating rail transit systems on X X
general railroad system, intercity
passenger train service, and commuter
train services.........................
PTPR operating rail transit systems not X X
part of general railroad system........
PTPR operating bus transit or commuter .............. X
bus systems in designated areas........
Tourist, scenic, historic, and excursion X X
rail owner/operators*..................
OTRB owner/operators providing fixed- .............. X
route service in designated areas......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Security Coordinator only required if notified by TSA in writing that
a threat exists. Requirement to report significant security concerns
always applies.
A. Security Coordinator Requirements (Sec. 1570.201)
Security coordinators are a vital part of transportation security,
providing TSA and other government agencies with an identified point of
contact with access to company leadership and knowledge of the owner/
operators' operations, in the event it is necessary to convey extremely
time-sensitive information about threats or security procedures to an
owner/operator, particularly in situations requiring frequent
information updates. The security coordinator and alternate provide TSA
with a contact in a position to understand security problems;
immediately raise issues with, or transmit information to, corporate or
system leadership; and help recognize when emergency response action is
appropriate. The individuals must be accessible to TSA 24 hours per
day, 7 days per week.
The rule does not change the expectation that the security
coordinator and alternate be appointed at the headquarters level. Nor
does the rule require the security coordinator or alternate to be a
dedicated position who has no other primary or additional duties. As
with the previous part 1580 requirements, TSA's primary concern is
having a designated point of contact available to TSA at all times.
The rule also requires the owner/operator to submit contact
information for both the security coordinator and alternate and to
update this information within 7 days if it changes. As previously
noted, this is not a new requirement for owner/operators of railroads,
including the rail transit operations of PTPR owner/operators. If an
owner/operator subject to this rule has provided current information
for primary and alternate RSCs to TSA, it will not have to take further
action to meet the requirement.\33\ TSA assumes this is true for
passenger rail carriers, freight railroad carriers, and rail transit
systems operated by public transportation agencies. Owner/operators
required to appoint security coordinators for the first time under this
rule must provide this information to TSA by July 29, 2020. TSA will
also use this contact for communications related to requirements in
this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Any changes to the information must, as previously
required, be reported within seven calendar days of the change
taking effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Requirement To Report Security Concerns (Sec. 1570.203)
As with the security coordinator requirement, TSA is moving and
consolidating the requirement to report security concerns from part
1580 into Sec. 1570.203 and extending it to higher-risk bus
operations.\34\ The list of reportable incidents can be found in
Appendix A to part 1570 and includes not only a list of incidents, but
descriptions and examples to assist regulated parties in making a
determination of whether an incident must be reported based on its
similarity to one of the examples.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ This extension is within TSA's discretion to require other
actions or procedures determined to be appropriate to address the
security of public transportation and OTRB operations. See 9/11 Act
sections. 1405(c)(2)(I) and 1531(e)(1)(H), as codified at 6 U.S.C.
1134 and 1181, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list of reportable significant security concerns is consistent
with the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative
(NSI). The NSI is a partnership between Federal, State, local, tribal,
and territorial law enforcement that ``establishes a national capacity
for gathering, documenting, processing, analyzing and sharing SAR
information . . . in a manner that rigorously protects the privacy and
civil liberties of Americans.'' \35\ The NSI defines ``suspicious
activity'' as ``observed behavior reasonably indicative of pre-
operational planning associated with terrorism or other criminal
activity.'' \36\ The standardized approach among law enforcement
officers and security officials with surface transportation entities
produces more informative reports that can, more effectively, focus
investigative efforts and intelligence analysis for potential trends
and indicators of terrorism-related activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See Nationwide SAR Initiative (NSI), ``About the NSI''
(accessed Nov. 3, 2016), available at https://nsi.ncirc.gov/about_nsi.aspx.
\36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, consistent with TSA's purpose in requiring submission of
the information, the rule requires notification within 24-hours of the
initial discovery of the incident by the owner/operator (see 49 CFR
1570.203(a)).\37\ This schedule will enable TSA to obtain timely
information, without undermining the ability of the owner/operator to
appropriately handle a situation. If there is an immediate threat,
owner/operators and/or their employees should prioritize notifying and
working with first responders. The notification to TSA should occur
after the immediate crisis is addressed, but within a timeframe that
allows TSA to assess and share timely information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ This change to reporting is a modification from the
requirement as promulgated in the Rail Security Rule, which required
immediate reporting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For purposes of this requirement, the clock ``starts running'' when
the owner/operator becomes aware of the incident. Awareness of the
owner/operator includes awareness of (or discovery by) employees of the
owner/operator.\38\ TSA recognizes that local law enforcement do not
always immediately notify owner/operators when there is a security-
related incident on the owner/operator's property or affecting their
operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ One of the required training elements includes how to
appropriately report security issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Methods for Reporting Information and Substance of Information
Provided (Sec. 1570.203 (a) and (c))
As previously noted, TSA has almost a decade of experience with
incidents reported by railroads. Based on this experience, TSA
recognizes that its ability to analyze the data and improve
[[Page 16467]]
the quality of information disseminated back to its stakeholders is
proportional to the quality of information it receives. Section
1570.203(b) is consistent with the reporting requirements as
promulgated in 2008, which reflected the need for detailed and verified
information from individual owner/operators to enhance TSA's ability to
provide timely and useful information products to all of the relevant
stakeholders.
TSA is working on two initiatives that should assist owner/
operators with reporting information. The first is to pilot an
electronic reporting option for significant security concerns.\39\ If
made a permanent capability, TSA intends to develop an online form that
owner/operators, or their designated employees, may use to submit
information to TSA to meet the requirements of this rule. If the pilot
succeeds, TSA may pursue a second initiative to provide an electronic
reporting form on a secure website. TSA will provide updates on
development of these capabilities to owner/operators through the
designated security coordinators as well as appropriate notices in the
Federal Register. Pending completion of these capabilities owner/
operators and their designated employees are generally required to meet
the requirements of this section by contacting the Transportation
Security Operations Center at 1-866-615-5150. There is an exception for
owner/operators participating in the pilot to report electronically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See OMB Control No. 1652-0051, 30-Day Notice: Revision of
Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Rail
Transportation Security, 83 FR 40542 (Aug. 15, 2018), and related
supporting statement available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=201809-1652-002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Security Program Procedures
A. Deadlines Related to Submission and Approval of Security Training
Program
Section 1570.109 identifies the required deadlines for submitting
security training programs and the process for TSA approval. In
general, not later than 90 days from the effective date of this final
rule, owner/operators are required to submit programs to TSA in a form
and manner prescribed by TSA. Owner/operators commencing new businesses
or operations triggering applicability are required to submit their
security training programs to TSA no less than 60 days before
commencing operations.
TSA will provide details for submission of security programs
directly to security coordinators identified under section 1570.201,
within 10 business days from the effective date of this final rule.
Consistent with comments received on the NPRM, this information will
include the designated email address and any related information
regarding submission of Sensitive Security Information (SSI).
As required by the 9/11 Act, TSA will review the programs within 60
days of receipt and either approve them or specify changes that are
needed for approval.\40\ If TSA requires changes, the owner/operator
must submit a modified training program that meets TSA's specifications
within 30 days of notification by TSA. TSA provides an analysis of
burden and estimated costs associated with this information collection
in section VIII.A. of this preamble and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) 83-I Supporting Statement for its information collection
request, which is available in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See 9/11 Act secs. 1137(d)(2), 1167(d)(2), and 1184(d)(2),
codified at 6 U.S.C. 1137, 1167, and 1184.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Amendments
Procedures related to revision and/or amendment of security
training programs, as described in Sec. Sec. 1570.113, 1570.115, and
1570.117, are necessary as part of developing a regulatory program and
are consistent with the 9/11 Act's requirements for implementation and
submission of programs. These procedures are also consistent with TSA's
statutory authority to allow exemptions from regulatory
requirements.\41\ The rule provides for two types of amendments: (1)
Amendments initiated by owner/operators and (2) amendments initiated by
TSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See 49 U.S.C. 114(q).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Amendments Initiated by Owner/Operator (Sec. 1570.113)
Under section 1570.113, there are three situations which require
owner/operators to submit a request to amend their security training
programs: (1) Changes affecting ownership or control of the operations;
(2) changes to conditions affecting security; and (3) changes to
content in the security training program. Owner/operators must seek an
amendment if any of these changes are expected to have a duration of
more than 60 days.
Amendments related to changes in ownership/control are necessary
for TSA to maintain current information about relevant contacts as well
as for purposes related to enforcement and liability. Amendments
related to the second and third categories are necessary to ensure the
training programs are providing relevant and timely information to
security-sensitive employees.
This final rule revises the NPRM's proposed requirement for seeking
an amendment for any changes relating to ``measures, training, or
staffing described in the security program.'' Since publication of the
NPRM, TSA determined that the scope of this requirement is too broad as
it could capture measures relevant to security in general, such as
theft. As proposed, the requirement could impose an unnecessary burden
on owner/operators and create conflict between the programmatic
requirements. For example, the overly broad requirement for amendments
could result in the need to revise a security training program to
address issues not related to reducing the risk of terrorism-related
incidents.
To narrow the scope of the amendment requirement, the final rule
incorporates a specific list of the types of changes to security that
require an amendment. For purposes of identifying what types of changes
should be included in the list, TSA determined the most appropriate
source is the 9/11 Act's requirements for TSA to issue a vulnerability
assessment and security planning regulation for surface owner/
operators.\42\ The 9/11 Act's provisions are tailored to security
issues related to reducing the risk of terrorism-related incidents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ As previously discussed, the 9/11 Act includes a mandate
for TSA to issue regulations requiring vulnerability assessments and
security plans in addition to the requirements for security
training. See 9/11 Act sections 1405, 1612, and 1531, codified at 6
U.S.C. 1134, 1162, and 1181, respectively. The security planning
requirements include a detailed list of security measures that must
be incorporated into an owner/operator's TSA-approved security plan.
TSA intends to address the vulnerability assessment and security
training requirements through a separate rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If an owner/operator makes any changes to the security measures
identified in Sec. 1570.113, the owner/operator must request an
amendment to modify the TSA-approved security training program to align
with these changes. In general, the program must be amended if there
are changes to procedures intended to prevent and detect unauthorized
access to restricted areas; measures to be implemented in response to
periods of heightened security risk; and changes to emergency response
plans.
The security program requirements established by this rulemaking
will also be applicable to a future rulemaking to address the 9/11
Act's requirements for
[[Page 16468]]
vulnerability assessments and security planning. As a result,
incorporating the 9/11 Act's list of security measures to be
incorporated in security planning as the basis for determining when an
amendment is necessary to a security training program establishes a
framework that can be consistently applied in the future as the scope
of requirements for higher-risk owner/operators of surface
transportation systems is expanded.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See discussion supra in n. 42
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, owner/operators must request an amendment if their
security training program is modified, including modifications related
to addressing the effectiveness of the program or development of
recurrent training materials that differ from the initial training.
This provision is intended to ensure an owner/operator is appropriately
addressing the results of its TSA-approved method for determining
effectiveness of security training.\44\ It is TSA's intent that this
specificity will reduce the burden for owner/operators by providing
clarity on the types of changes that may trigger the need for an
amendment. If there are any changes in these areas, it is reasonable to
expect that some aspects of the security training program must be
revised.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ See requirements in subpart B to parts 1580, 1582, and
1584.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the preceding issues that require owner/operators to
request an amendment, the same procedures can be used when the owner/
operator seeks to amend its program to address other operation issues.
For example, an owner/operator may choose to seek an amendment to
modify the required training schedule. The same procedural requirements
for seeking an amendment apply.
TSA may approve an amendment if it is in the interest of public and
transportation security and meets the required security standards. As
part of its standard practice for security program administration, TSA
works with owner/operators on amendment requests to develop options
acceptable to both TSA and the requesting owner/operator. TSA may ask
for additional information from the owner/operator or require more time
in order to makes its determination.
If TSA is unable to come to agreement with the owner/operator on
the content or scope of the amendment, TSA may deny the amendment
request. The denial will include a statement of why the request is
denied. The owner/operator can petition for reconsideration under
section 1570.119.
While the rule only requires amendments if the change is to be
permanent (defined as 60 or more calendar days), TSA recognizes that
there are times when a change of short duration could have a
significant impact on training. For example, if a city is hosting a
National Special Security Event (NSSE), the public transportation
system serving that city may implement additional security measures. It
is likely that additional training will be necessary to raise
appropriate awareness of these additional measures. The rule does not
require the owner/operator to request an amendment to provide this
additional training.
TSA is also modifying the schedule for submitting an amendment from
the requirement as proposed in the NPRM. Under the NPRM, an amendment
had to be submitted no later than 45 days before the change takes
effect. This schedule does not work with the provision that allows
changes to security measures to be in effect for 60 days before they
are considered permanent, and only permanent changes require
notification and amendment. To address this inconsistency, TSA is
requiring amendments to be submitted within 65 days of the change. As
the owner/operator controls changes to the security measures identified
in the rule and whether these changes will be permanent, it is presumed
the owner/operator will have sufficient advance notice that an
amendment is needed and can prepare and submit the request within this
timeframe. This specificity is added to provide clarity for compliance.
2. Amendments Initiated by TSA (Sec. 1570.115)
TSA may require amendments in the interest of the public and
transportation security. As indicated in Sec. 1570.115, TSA may
require owner/operators to revise their training based on emerging
threats or methods for addressing emerging threats. This is consistent
with TSA's authorities under 49 U.S.C. 114 and the 9/11 Act, which
specifically provide that TSA must update the requirements, as
appropriate, ``to reflect new or changing security threats.'' \45\ For
example, the curriculum requirements identified in the 9/11 Act do not
address training to respond to active shooter incidents. Following
several active shooter incidents, including one that resulted in the
death of a Transportation Security Officer in Los Angeles, Congress
prioritized the need for this type of training.\46\ TSA could also
require an amendment to provide additional training to address risks
like the NSSE discussed above, in section C. As with other requirements
imposed by TSA, the owner/operator may request a petition for
reconsideration of TSA-required amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ See 9/11 Act at 1408(d)(4), 1517(d)(4), and 1534(d)(4),
codified at 6 U.S.C. 1137, 1167, and 1184, respectively. This
provision also requires owner/operators change their programs to
address TSA's requires updates and retrain employees as necessary,
within a reasonable time.
\46\ Section 7 of the Gerardo Hernandez Airport Security Act of
2015 (Pub. L. 114-50), which directed TSA, in consultation with the
Department of Transportation and other relevant agencies, to conduct
outreach to all passenger transportation agencies and providers of
high-risk facilities to verify such agencies and providers have in
place plans to respond to active shooters, acts of terrorism, or
other security-related incidents that target passengers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Alternative Measures (Sec. 1570.117)
Section 1570.117 includes the procedures for requesting a waiver,
procedures for requesting the use of alternative measures, and
identification of the types of information TSA will need in order to
make a decision to grant such requests. TSA may grant such a request
under the authority 49 U.S.C. 114(q), based on a determination that the
alternative measure or exemption is in the public interest. In general,
TSA will consider factors such as risk associated with the type of
operation, current threat information, and any other factors relevant
to potential risk to the public and transportation security if the
request is granted.
These procedures can be used by an owner/operator to request
alternative measures to satisfy all of some or all of the requirements
of subchapter D. For example, the owner/operator could request to
extend the time period for submitting its training program or for
training all of its security-sensitive employees. An owner/operator
could also request a waiver from some or all of the regulatory
requirements. For example, a freight railroad may meet the criteria for
applicability, but the operations that trigger applicability may be a
de minimis part of its overall business operations. In such a
situation, the owner/operator might consider requesting either a
complete waiver or an alternative that limits the requirements to a
more discrete part of its business.
D. Petitions for Reconsideration (Sec. 1570.119)
Section 1570.119 describes the review and petition process for
TSA's reconsideration when it denies a request for amendment, waiver,
or alternative measures, as well as a TSA requirement
[[Page 16469]]
to modify or amend a program. If an owner/operator seeks to challenge
the decision, the owner/operator is required to submit a written
petition for reconsideration within the time frame identified in the
applicable section. The petition must include a statement, with
supporting documentation, explaining why the owner/operator believes
the reason for the denial or for the amendment, as applicable, is
incorrect. If the owner/operator requested the amendment, the results
of the reconsideration could be confirmation of TSA's previous denial
or approval of the proposed amendment. If the issue involves a TSA-
required amendment, the results of the reconsideration could be
withdrawal, affirmation, or modification of the amendment. A
disposition pursuant to 49 CFR 1570.119 occurs when the Administrator
or designee has disposed of the petition by affirming, modifying, or
rescinding the previous decision. Such disposition constitutes a final
agency action for purposes of review under 49 U.S.C. 46110.
E. Recordkeeping Requirements (Sec. 1570.121)
The final rule requires owner/operators to create and maintain
lists of their security-sensitive employees and specify when these
employees received the required training. Training records must include
each trained employee's name, job title or function, date of hiring,
and date and course information on the most recent security training
that each employee received. Records for individual employees must
reflect the training courses completed and date of completion. Records
of an employee's initial and recurrent training must be maintained by
owner/operators for no less than five years from the date of the
training and available at the location(s) specified in the security
training program approved by TSA.
The final rule provides flexibility to owner/operators to decide
whether to maintain the records in electronic format provided that (1)
any electronic records system used is designed to prevent tampering,
loss of data, or corruption of records, and (2) paper copies of
records, and any amendments to these records, must be made available to
TSA upon request for inspection or copying. Whether the records are
kept in electronic or other form, the employee must be provided with
proof of training upon request, at any time during the three-year
recordkeeping period, without regard to the requestor's current status
as an employee of that entity. As discussed above in II.J. (Initial
Training), owner/operators may meet the proof-of-training requirement
by providing a certificate, letter, or other similar documentation to
the employee upon completion of training. In order for TSA to allow any
owner/operator to rely upon previous security training to satisfy the
requirements of this rule, it is critical that employees be able to
validate whether they received previous training.
TSA assumes training records are unlikely to include SSI, but
nonetheless provides a reminder in this provision that any SSI
maintained as a result of these recordkeeping requirements must be
maintained consistent with the requirements in 49 CFR part 1520. For
example, an owner/operator may decide to keep a copy of the content of
the training program with the employee files (which is not required by
the rule). If the curriculum contains SSI information, any file it is
in must be stored as required by the SSI regulations. Owner/operators
needing additional information about appropriately maintaining SSI may
contact TSA for assistance and/or find information on TSA's
website.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/sensitive-security-information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Summary of Deadlines
The following table summarizes the deadlines for the preceding
programmatic requirements. The information is provided for operations
that exist on the effective date of this rule and those that may
commence or trigger applicability based on future modifications.
Table 3--Summary of Deadlines for Compliance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dates
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement New employees (hired
Existing operations New or modified after TSA approves the
operations security program)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effective date of rule............... June 22, 2020..........
Deadline for notifying TSA of July 22, 2020.......... 90 calendar days before
applicability determination commencing new or
(1570.105). modified operations.
Deadline for providing security July 29, 2020.......... 7 calendar days after
coordinator information to TSA commencement of
(1570.201). operations.
Deadline for submission of security 90 calendar days from 90 calendar days after
training program to TSA for approval effective date. commencing new or
(1570.109(b)). modified operations.
TSA approval or notification of 60 calendar days from 60 calendar days from
required modification (1570.109(c)). receipt of security receipt of security
training program. training program.
Initial training of security- 1 year from TSA 1 year from TSA 60 calendar days after
sensitive employees (1570.111(a)). approval of security approval of security employee first
training program. training program. performs a security-
sensitive job function
(60th day, aggregated
over 12-month period,
if intermittent
employee).
Recurrent training of security- Within three-years of Within 90 days of
sensitive employees (1570.111(b)). the date of initial changes to security
training and every program or security
three-years thereafter. plan affecting
employees' security-
related
responsibilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 16470]]
V. Miscellaneous Changes
This final rule includes the following changes to other provisions
in TSA's regulations as necessary to implement these requirements.
A. Amendments to Part 1500
Consistent with the rule's organization, TSA includes definitions
for terms relevant to several subchapters of TSA regulations, beyond
the requirements of subchapter D, in part 1500. Terms only relevant to
the provisions in subchapter D are incorporated in Sec. 1570.3. Terms
uniquely relevant to each mode or the other requirements in subchapter
D are incorporated into the relevant parts.
As noted in the NPRM, TSA is meeting a 9/11 mandate to define,
through notice and comment rulemaking, the term ``security-sensitive
material.'' To meet the requirement, TSA is incorporating by reference
the definition of hazardous materials for which a security program is
required under 49 CFR 172.800(b), promulgated by PHMSA through notice
and comment rulemaking and in consultation with TSA.\48\ There are no
current TSA-programmatic requirements linked to this definition. A full
discussion of amendments to the terms in part 1500 is provided in the
NPRM.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See 81 FR at 91344.
\49\ See section III.A. of the NPRM. 81 FR at 91342 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Amendments to Part 1503
TSA is making minor amendments to part 1503 (Investigative and
Enforcement Procedures), as necessary, to conform these regulations to
changes made by this final rule. In Sec. 1503.101(b), the scope of
statutory provisions is amended to add authorities from the 9/11 Act
that are administered by the TSA Administrator. These are conforming
amendments with no cost impact.
C. Amendments to Part 1520
TSA is also finalizing proposed modifications to part 1520
(Protection of Sensitive Security Information). As discussed in the
NPRM, these changes are necessary to conform the SSI provisions to
include the transportation security-related requirements in this
rule.\50\ The amendments are limited to: (1) Eliminating unnecessary
terms from part 1520 that are added to part 1500 and (2) replacing the
limiting term ``rail transportation security requirement'' with
``surface transportation security requirement.'' In some places, such
as the definition of ``vulnerability assessment'' in Sec. 1520.3, TSA
is streamlining a lengthy description of types of transportation to
simply state ``aviation, maritime, or surface transportation.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See id. at 91343-91345.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The impact of these revisions should also be minimal. Under Sec.
1520.7(j), any person who has access to SSI is required to protect it
according to the requirements of the regulation. Most of the population
affected by this rule has previously received SSI information from TSA,
as well as training on the proper handling of SSI, and have procedures
in place to ensure the requirements of the regulation are met.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/sensitive-security-information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Amendments to Part 1570
Because of the significant restructuring of part 1570, as discussed
above, the rule text includes the entire part. In addition, TSA is
adding a provision related to security responsibilities and relocating
to this part the provisions related to compliance, inspection, and
enforcement (previously in part 1580).
1. Security Responsibilities for Employees and Other Persons (Sec.
1570.7)
Under Sec. 1570.7, the obligation for compliance is not limited to
owner/operators specifically referenced under applicability provisions.
Rather, any person may be held to have violated these rules, including
contractors who provide service to owner/operators and the employees of
such contractors. This provision in subchapter D ensures a uniform
application of TSA's enforcement policy across all modes of
transportation, consistent with TSA's authority under 49 U.S.C.
114(f).\52\ In addition to violations for failure to comply with
requirements, TSA can also pursue enforcement actions for interfering
with compliance or hiding evidence of non-compliance. Contractors are
also subject to inspection for compliance with this rule and
enforcement actions, as discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See 49 U.S.C. 114(f)(7) and (11). A similar provision
applicable to aviation employees and other related persons is in 49
CFR 1540.105(a)(1) and (b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Compliance, Inspection, and Enforcement (Sec. 1570.9)
TSA is mandated to: (1) Enforce its regulations and requirements;
(2) oversee the implementation and ensure the adequacy of security
measures; and (3) inspect, maintain, and test security facilities,
equipment, and systems for all modes of transportation.\53\ This
mandate applies even in the absence of rulemaking, but TSA has chosen
to include a restatement of its authority in its rules. The statute
specifically requires TSA to--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See 49 U.S.C. 114(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assess threats to transportation;
Enforce security-related regulations and requirements;
Inspect, maintain, and test security of facilities,
equipment, and systems;
Ensure the adequacy of security measures for the
transportation of cargo;
Oversee the implementation, and ensure the adequacy, of
security measures at airports and other transportation facilities;
Require background checks for airport security screening
personnel, individuals with access to secure areas of airports, and
other transportation security personnel; and
Carry out such other duties, and exercise such other
powers, relating to transportation security as the Administrator
considers appropriate, to the extent authorized by law.
While current part 1570 includes a provision stating TSA's
compliance, inspection, and enforcement authority, it is not provide
the same detail found in other regulatory provisions.\54\ Therefore,
TSA is transferring the text of current Sec. 1580.5 to subpart A as
Sec. 1570.9, with minor modifications to reflect the addition of
certain bus operations that have previously been unregulated by
TSA.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ Compare current Sec. 1570.11 with current Sec. 1580.5.
The provision in part 1580 is also consistent with 49 CFR 1542.5,
1544.3. 1546.3, 1548.3, and 1549.3.
\55\ A more detailed discussion of current Sec. 1580.5, still
relevant to the section, can be found in the preamble for current
part 1580. See 71 FR 76852 (Dec. 21, 2006) and the Rail Security
Rule, see supra n. 8. (Final Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. ``Covered Person'' (Sec. 1570.305)
This final rule includes a technical correction to Sec. 1570.305
(currently Sec. 1570.13) of subchapter D as part of this rulemaking.
This provision prohibits public transportation agencies and rail
carriers from knowingly misrepresenting Federal guidance or regulations
related to security background checks for certain individuals.\56\ The
definitions in the section currently include the term ``covered
individual,'' which may result in confusion as to whether the term has
the same meaning as ``covered person'' in TSA's programs to address
access to SSI.\57\ To eliminate any potential for confusion, this rule
amends Sec. 1570.305
[[Page 16471]]
to delete the definition and consistently use the term ``employee'' (as
defined by this rulemaking in Sec. 1570.3) rather than ``covered
individual.'' This change is for clarification purposes only and has no
substantive impact.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ This final rule moves this section from Sec. 1570.13 of
subchapter D to section Sec. 1570.305. The requirement was added to
address another 9/11 Act requirement. See 73 FR 44665 (July 31,
2008) for more information on the rulemaking that added this
provision.
\57\ See 49 CFR 1520.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Summary of Changes
The following table summarizes changes between the NPRM and final
rule.
Table 4--Summary of Changes Between NPRM and Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section No. Section title Change from NPRM Implication
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1570.111(b)....................... Implementation In response to comments, Cost Savings.
schedules (recurrent TSA is modifying the
security training). recurrent security
training schedule to a
three-year cycle rather
than annual. Changes to
security programs and
plans may require
training certain
employees within 90 days
of the changes.
1570.113.......................... Amendments requested NPRM proposed requiring TSA recognizes that some
by owner/operator. owner/operators to owner/operators may have
request an amendment to security programs that
their security training address issues not
programs when there are related to
changes to (a) ownership transportation security,
or control of operations such as theft or
and/or (b) measures, vandalism. TSA is
training, or staffing narrowing the scope of
described in the security the requirement to
program. The final rule reduce the burden. The
includes a specific list final rule identifies
of the types of changes the types of issues that
that would trigger the would require amendment.
need to update the The list of issues used
security training by TSA is consistent
program. The NPRM also with the requirements
proposed to require an for security plans in
amendment to be filed sections 1405, 1512, and
within 45 days before the 1531 of the 9/11 Act.
amendment takes effect. Modifying the deadline
The final rule requires for requesting an
an amendment to be amendment is intended to
requested no later than provide clarity for
65 days after the change compliance and be more
to the security program/ appropriate for the
measures/plans takes types of amendment-
effect. requests TSA expects to
receive.
1570.201.......................... Security coordinator. NPRM proposed requiring The scope of this
all public transportation requirement in the NPRM
agencies to have a was broader than TSA
security coordinator. intended as the result a
Final rule limits the drafting error. TSA
scope of the requirement intended the security
to rail operations of coordinator requirement
public transportation to apply to all of the
agencies and the bus-only rail operations and
operations of those shippers/receivers
determined by TSA to be covered by the Rail
higher-risk. Security Rule, plus bus
operations required to
provide security
training under this
rule.
1570.203.......................... Reporting significant NPRM proposed requiring The scope of this
security concerns. all public transportation requirement in the NPRM
agencies to report was broader than TSA
security issues. Final intended as the result
rule limits the scope of of a drafting error. TSA
the requirement to rail intended the reporting
operations of public requirement to apply to
transportation agencies all of the rail
and the bus-only operations and shippers/
operations of those receivers covered by the
determined by TSA to be Rail Security Rule, plus
higher-risk. bus operations that are
required to provide
security training under
this rule.
1570.305.......................... False statements TSA is making a technical This technical revision
regarding security correction to this eliminates potential
background checks by provision by replacing confusion in the
public the term ``covered terminology.
transportation individual,'' with the
agency or railroad term ``employee,'' which
carrier. is defined by this
rulemaking in Sec.
1570.3.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. Response to Comments on NPRM
Following TSA's publication of the NRPM on December 16, 2016,
industry associations, unions, and private citizens were among those
who submitted comments in docket TSA 2015-0001. TSA's responses are
organized by topic.
A. General Comments
1. Need for Rule
Comments endorsing the rulemaking and recommending an expanded
scope: A number of submissions included a statement of general support
for TSA to issue this rulemaking. Commenters also endorsed the rule,
noting that proper training could prevent harm to both employees and
passengers. A few commenters suggested expanding the scope of the
rulemaking to include additional training for surface workers, such as
self-defense training, or to provide training to all American citizens
to identify terrorist threats. One commenter supported a ``community of
the whole'' approach, reflecting the collaborative and cooperative
partnership between TSA and industry to detect and deter individuals
seeking to commit acts of terrorism.
TSA response: This rulemaking is intended to solidify a baseline of
security training. Promulgation of this rule does not signal a change
in TSA's commitment to maximize enhancements to surface transportation
security through voluntary cooperation and collaboration. Consistent
with this commitment, TSA does not believe it is necessary to expand
the scope of applicability or requirements, but encourages owner/
operators to provide additional security training as they consider
appropriate to address potential vulnerabilities or threats within
their unique operational environments. As noted in the NPRM, TSA
encourages owner/operators covered by this rule to determine
[[Page 16472]]
whether there are employees not covered by the scope of the security-
sensitive definition who could provide benefits to security if trained.
Regarding the recommended expansion of the rule to cover broader
populations, including the general public, DHS has numerous programs
and initiatives to provide and encourage awareness of terrorist threats
and appropriate responses. These initiatives include ``hometown
security'' and the ``See Something, Say Something'' campaign. More
information on these initiatives and training available to support them
can be found on the DHS website.\58\ TSA also encourages owners/
operators not within the scope of the rule's applicability to
voluntarily provide security training to their employees, using the
curriculum requirements in this rule to guide development of voluntary
security training programs. As noted in section II.A., TSA also intends
to provide resources developed to support this rule to other owner/
operators, as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ See www.dhs.gov/hometown-security and www.dhs.gov/see-something-say-something.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments opposing rulemaking: Other commenters opposed the
rulemaking, primarily because they believe certain modes already
conduct training, and asserted these efforts make the rulemaking
unnecessary. Three commenters expressed concern the rule overlaps with
existing State and Federal training requirements, including the FRA's
2014 final rule, which established minimum training standards for all
safety-related railroad employees.\59\ One commenter suggested States
may have different requirements, which should be considered in this
rulemaking. Several commenters advocated for the rule to be voluntary,
and noted voluntary training has so far produced exceptional results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ See 79 FR 66460 (Nov. 7, 2014), codified at 49 CFR part
243.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA response: As previously discussed, TSA has a statutory mandate
to publish a final rule requiring security training for frontline
employees of public transportation agencies, railroads, and OTRB owner/
operators.\60\ The statutory mandate includes specific requirements for
the content of the required security training. In addition, TSA
determined it is necessary to require security training for employees
of higher-risk surface transportation operations and appropriate to use
its general authority under ATSA to issue a rule including these
requirements.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ See discussion in section I.A. of this rule. See also 81 FR
91341 (discussion of statutory authorities and requirements for this
rulemaking).
\61\ See 81 FR 91339-91341 (discussion of purpose and
authorities).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The terrorism-related threat to surface transportation modes has
not subsided and Congress has not retreated from its commitment to the
need for this rule. Since enactment of the 9/11 Act, Members of
Congress and the DHS Office of the Inspector General (OIG) have
expressed continued interest in the publication of this rule.
This rulemaking is intended to solidify the baseline for security
training of surface employees. TSA recognizes the substantial efforts
of our stakeholders to enhance their security posture since 9/11 and
seeks to recognize and build upon these efforts. As noted in the NPRM,
owner/operators subject to requirements to provide similar training may
request to use this training to satisfy requirements in this rule. For
example, TSA is aware that many public transportation agencies and
railroads currently provide security training to comply with State or
Federal training requirements. (TSA is not aware of any overlapping
requirements for OTRB owner/operators.) If an owner/operator intends to
use previous training or existing training programs in order to satisfy
some or all of the requirements of this rule, the program submitted to
TSA for approval must identify how the other training satisfies TSA's
requirements. This will likely necessitate submitting the curriculum or
lesson plan for that program and training records, as well as
information on the employees who have completed the training and the
date of the most recent training.
Regarding voluntary training, TSA acknowledges many owner/operators
of higher-risk surface transportation operations have voluntarily
implemented security training programs addressing some of the
requirements in this rule. As noted in the Preliminary Regulatory
Impact Analysis and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (NPRM RIA),
however, the private market may not provide adequate incentives for
owner/operators to make an optimal investment in the full range of
measures to reduce the probability of a successful terrorist attack
based on the economics of externalities. Mandating security training
for higher-risk operations will solidify the current baseline of
security training established through voluntary measures.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ See NPRM RIA at 116-117 (available in the docket to this
rulemaking at www.regulations.gov).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Cost of Rule
Comments: Some commenters expressed concern that the cost of the
rulemaking is too high, and that the rule is too costly for industry to
implement. Commenters also asserted the estimate of OTRB owner/
operators is too low, and questioned whether TSA's cost-estimate
analysis considers the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA).\63\
One commenter generally suggested that the expense of providing
security awareness training to surface transportation personnel may not
be justified by the potential benefits. Another commenter, a mass
transit agency in a large metropolitan area, estimated the cost of the
rule to be higher than the estimate TSA provided in the NPRM RIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48 (Mar. 22, 1995), codified at
2 U.S.C. 1501-1538.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA response: A full discussion of the cost-benefit analysis is
included in the Final Regulatory Impact Analysis and Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (Final RIA) \64\ and summarized in section
VIII.B.1. While training and the other requirements of this final rule
are not absolute deterrents for a terrorist intent on carrying out
attacks on surface modes of transportation, TSA expects the probability
of success for such attacks to decrease when the requirements of this
rule are fully implemented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ The Final RIA is available in the docket for this
rulemaking at www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the commenters concerns that TSA's estimate of OTRB
owner/operators within the scope of applicability is too low, TSA
acknowledges the inherent uncertainty in this estimate due to the fluid
and opaque nature of the industry. As described in the Final RIA,
``many [OTRB] owner/operators that operate charter and/or tour services
also provide scheduled or fixed-route services, sometimes on an ad hoc
basis, making it difficult for any one source to keep track of those
that may provide scheduled service as part of their non-primary
operation.'' \65\ In response to the issue of disparate data, TSA
consulted multiple sources and databases to build its estimate.' The
commenter who stated the OTRB estimate was too low did not provide any
reason to support the claim that TSA underestimated the number of
affected owner/operators or any source/
[[Page 16473]]
data to back up the assertion. As mentioned in the NPRM RIA, TSA sought
public contribution to refine its estimate, but neither the commenter
nor anyone else provided any data or new information on which to build
a different estimate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ Id. at 40. Note: Under the requirements of this rule, any
owner/operators conducting ad hoc or sub-contracted service for a
regulated person must comply with the requirements of the rule as an
authorized representative. Similarly, an owner/operator not subject
to the requirements of the rule may trigger applicability if they
contract for ad hoc or subcontracted service through an area that
triggers applicability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title II of UMRA, establishes requirements for Federal Agencies to
assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and
tribal governments and the private sector.\66\ Agencies must prepare a
written statement, including a cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and
final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that may result in expenditures
by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year.\67\ TSA's
analysis for both the NPRM RIA and Final RIA determined this rule does
not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100
million or more either for State, local, and tribal governments in the
aggregate, or for the private sector in any one year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ See supra n. 63.
\67\ Id. at sec. 202, codified at 2 U.S.C. 1532. The $100
million in 1995 dollars is adjusted for inflation to 2017 dollars
using the GDP implicit price deflator for the U.S. economy. Bureau
of Economic Analysis, National Data, Table 1.1.4. Price Indexes for
Gross Domestic Product, Line 1 Gross domestic product. Available at:
https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=19&step=2#reqid=19&step=2&isuri=1&1921=survey.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The commenter who stated security awareness training may not be
justified by the potential benefits did not provide data to support
this assertion. Based upon the data available to TSA, as shown in the
Final RIA, TSA disagrees with the commenter. In both the NPRM and Final
RIA, TSA includes a chapter, titled ``Benefits of Employee Security
Training,'' which identifies the security risks to surface
transportation and explained how providing employees with the knowledge
to prepare, observe, assess, and respond to a terrorist related threat
or incident reduces the vulnerability to a terrorist attack. In
addition, TSA conducted a break even analysis that compared the cost of
the surface training program to the direct economic losses that would
be averted by avoiding certain terrorist attack scenarios. Given the
relative small costs of implementing training compared to the
catastrophic costs of a successful terrorist attack, this analysis
found that the rule would only have to deter, at minimum, one attack
every 40 years for the benefits to equal costs for freight rail, a
number that increases to one attack every 166 years for OTRBs.\68\ The
monetized benefits of preventing an attack would likely be greater were
TSA to conduct a break even analysis that accounts for the difficult-
to-estimate macroeconomic and other indirect impacts (avoided indirect
costs) that may be even more significant than the direct impacts of the
attack. Avoided consequences, such as the value of a reduction in fear
felt by the public at large, are not included in the analysis because
they are difficult to measure and quantify. Given these results and the
demonstrated effectiveness of employee training--including security
awareness in mitigating terrorist attacks \69\--TSA believes the
benefits of the rule justify its costs. Finally, as previously
discussed, TSA is under a statutory mandate to publish a final rule
requiring security training for frontline employees of public
transportation agencies, railroads, and OTRB owner/operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ See Final RIA at Section 4.3.
\69\ See id. at Section 4.1 (full summary of the threat to
surface transportation and an example of security training
effectiveness).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One commenter, from a large metropolitan area public transportation
system, provided information to support statements that the costs of
implementing the rule would be higher than TSA estimated in the NPRM
RIA for that commenter. TSA believes there are a number of issues with
the commenter's estimate that result in an overestimation of the rule's
burden. The commenter assumed the duration of training to be three
hours when TSA estimates that training for security-sensitive employees
of a PTPR owner/operator will likely average 1 hour and 20 minutes in
order to address all of the required elements in this rule.\70\ The
commenter appears to base their three hour estimate on an assumption
that a classroom setting and development of original course material is
necessary. As further discussed below in section VII.D., TSA is not
requiring instructor or classroom training and will further mitigate
costs by providing a video, free of charge, to regulated owner/
operators for compliance with the parts of the rule. TSA intends for
this material to cover three of the four PTPR training elements in the
rule and take less than one hour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ See Final RIA at Section 2.4 for an explanation and
rationale to why TSA estimates 1 and 20 minutes needed to train mass
transit agencies' security-sensitive employees on the training
components of the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the commenter comes from one of the largest metropolitan
areas in the United States with one of highest costs of living. This
leads TSA to believe that the estimate provided by the commenter is
likely higher than the national average of transit agencies. TSA used
national wage data for transit agencies from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics to estimate cost of the rule to PTPR owner/operators. TSA
believes this is a reasonable rate to calculate incurred costs to
regulated PTPR owner/operators because it encompasses the entire
transit industry (which are typically found in cities around the
country). Based on this analysis, TSA believes its cost-assessment for
the final rule is representative of the incremental burden PTPR owner/
operators will incur from implementing the regulatory requirements at a
national level. However, TSA does acknowledge that differences in the
cost of labor among the various cities may contribute to certain
transit agencies having higher or lower costs than the national
average.
3. Stakeholder Consultation
Comments: Several commenters suggested TSA consult with labor
unions in drafting the rulemaking, as required by the 9/11 Act, and
also reach out to international security experts.
TSA response: The 9/11 Act directed TSA to consult with major
stakeholders during the development of the NPRM, including labor
organizations. As noted and summarized in the NPRM, TSA conducted
numerous meetings and conference calls with all necessary parties,
including relevant labor organizations.\71\ In addition to inviting
participation of labor union representatives in many of the mode-
specific meetings, TSA also met directly with labor unions as part of
its stakeholder consultation process, including the Transportation
Trades Department of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of
Industrial Organizations, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, and the Amalgamated Transit
Union.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ See 81 FR 91336 at 91368-91370.
\72\ See id. at 91370.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
International outreach is also a key component of TSA's
transportation security mission. TSA surface representatives partner
with the international community through a number of forums, such as
INTERPOL, European Network of Railway Police Forces (RAILPOL), and the
United Nations led International Working Group Land Transport Security
(IWGLTS). These meetings include a regular exchange of lessons learned
in addressing emerging threats within the surface transportation
environment.
4. Terms
Comments on definition of ``transportation security-sensitive
materials (TSSM)'': Several commenters
[[Page 16474]]
asked for clarification regarding how the TSSM definition applies to
motor coaches, and suggested industry aid TSA in determining what
should qualify as TSSM. One commenter asked TSA to provide handling and
storage information regarding TSSM specific to the motor coach
industry.
TSA response: As noted in the NPRM, TSA is satisfying a 9/11 Act
requirement to define TSSM \73\ by incorporating by reference the
hazardous materials identified in 49 CFR 172.800(b). There are no
specific requirements in the rule related to the definition. To the
extent there are requirements associated with the materials identified
in 49 CFR 172.800(b), persons should consult 49 CFR part 172, the
hazardous materials rules promulgated by PHMSA. The PHMSA rules include
security requirements related to these specific materials. The PHMSA
requirements were promulgated through notice and comment rulemaking,
including participation by relevant stakeholders in developing the list
of materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ Id. at 91344.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on definition of ``host railroad'': One commenter asserted
the definition of ``host railroad'' is confusing. Additionally, the
commenter noted TSA's expectations of the railroads responsible for
ensuring training of employees in ``host'' situations are unclear, as
railroads currently train employees under existing training programs.
TSA response: As noted in the NPRM,\74\ TSA is defining ``host
railroad'' consistent with the definition well-established by use for
the rail industry under rules of the FRA.\75\ Under this rule, both the
host and tenant railroads are required to have a training program that
appropriately addresses the ramifications of the hosting relationship.
For example, the host railroad's training program will need to address
the operational considerations of the hosting relationship, such as
training dispatchers on their role and responsibilities in halting the
tenant railroad's operations over a segment of track where there is a
potential threat (such as a suspected IED or tampering with
infrastructure). Similarly, a tenant railroad subject to the security
training requirements of 49 CFR part 1582 (PTPR), will need to address
the operational considerations of the hosting relationship, such as
instructing its train and engine employees on the proper communication
procedures to follow when a potential threat is identified. Under
either example, the host and tenant railroad owner/operators will only
be responsible for training their own employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ Id. at Table 3, Explanation of Proposed Terms and
Definitions.
\75\ See 49 CFR 236.1003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When inspecting for compliance by regulated parties participating
in a contractual relationship, TSA will consider the freight railroad
carrier (the private company) to be an authorized representative of the
PTPR owner/operator (the owner/operator of the passenger train
service). TSA will hold the PTPR owner/operator primarily responsible
for compliance and for ensuring that all security-sensitive employees
receive the required training, whether they are employed directly by
the PTPR owner/operator or contractor. The PTPR owner/operator must
train the freight railroad carrier's employees performing security-
sensitive functions related to the passenger train service.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ See supra, section II.A.4 for more discussion on the
distinction between hosting and contractual relationships and the
ramifications for responsibility of providing security training.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Investigative and Enforcement Procedures
Comments on penalties and violations under 49 CFR part 1503:
Several commenters requested clarification regarding the exact
penalties for non-compliance, and others asked TSA to explain the basis
of violations.
TSA response: The 9/11 Act included authority for TSA to assess
civil penalties for violations of title 49 of the U.S. Code, including
surface transportation requirements.\77\ TSA posts, and regularly
updates, its sanction policies on its website.\78\ Between this rule's
date of publication and effective date, TSA will update this policy to
address violations of this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ See sec. 1302(a) of the 9/11 Act. TSA is issuing this rule
under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 114.
\78\ See https://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement_sanction_guidance_policy.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on compliance, inspection, and enforcement under 49 CFR
1570.9: Several commenters expressed concern regarding how TSA will
enforce the rule. One commenter suggested TSA and relevant DOT
components should develop a cooperative enforcement program allowing
DOT personnel to enforce TSA's security training requirements as they
conduct their safety inspections. Several commenters suggested TSA
coordinate with the owner/operator before an inspection, and one
suggested that TSA provide an audit checklist before arriving on the
owner/operator's property. Another commenter asked TSA inspectors to
undergo safety training before visiting the property. Finally, one
commenter suggested TSA consider an audit program for contractors,
rather than making the owner/operator responsible for ensuring
contractor receives training or otherwise comply with the rule's
requirements.
TSA response: As explained in the NPRM, TSA is mandated to: (1)
Enforce its rules and requirements; (2) oversee the implementation and
ensure the adequacy of security measures; and; (3) inspect, maintain,
and test security facilities, equipment, and systems for all modes of
transportation.\79\ TSA's authority over transportation security is
comprehensive and supported with specific powers related to the
development and enforcement of security-related regulations and other
requirements. Within this broad authority, the agency may assess a
security risk for any mode of transportation and develop security
measures for dealing with this risk.\80\ If TSA identifies
noncompliance with its requirements, TSA may hold the owner/operators
responsible for the violation and subject to enforcement action, which
may result in civil monetary penalties.\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ See 81 FR 91341, citing 49 U.S.C. 114.
\80\ 49 U.S.C. 114(f) and (l).
\81\ 49 U.S.C. 114(f) and (v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to its statutory authority and responsibilities, TSA is
the sole Federal agency with authority to enforce its regulations.
DOT's components do not have authority to enforce TSA's rules and TSA
cannot enforce theirs. DHS and DOT, however, do consult and coordinate
with each other on security-related issues pursuant to various
memoranda of understanding (MOU). To mitigate concerns about
duplication of efforts by inspectors, DHS has entered into an MOU with
DOT with separate annexes between TSA and the modal components of DOT.
These annexes address coordination on regulatory matters.
When appropriate, TSA will coordinate with an owner/operator on
inspections. Notice gives the parties to be inspected the opportunity
to gather evidence of compliance and to arrange to have the appropriate
personnel available to assist TSA. Some inspections, however, can only
be effective if TSA's presence is unannounced. TSA must have the
flexibility to respond to information, operations, and specific
circumstances whenever they exist or develop.
Security concerns are different at different times of the day and
on different days of the week. Terrorists may seek to take advantage of
vulnerabilities whenever they occur.
[[Page 16475]]
TSA has the authority to assess the security of transportation entities
during all times of the day or night and under all operational
situations (including nights, weekends, and holidays). The nature of
any given TSA inspection will depend on the specific circumstances
surrounding a particular owner/operator at a given point in time and
will be considered in conjunction with available threat information.
An audit checklist is unnecessary for this program. Under the rule,
owner/operators are required to submit a security training program to
TSA for approval. As the regulated owner/operators are the original
drafters of the security training program approved by TSA, they should
not need a checklist from TSA to inform them of the program's content
and requirements. The use of TSA-provided training material does not
eliminate the owner/operator's ownership of the program and knowledge
of the program's contents. The security training program developed and
submitted by the owner/operator to TSA for approval is likely to
include additional information provided or developed by the owner/
operator to meet all of the curriculum requirements.
Regarding having TSA inspectors undergo safety training prior to
visiting a property, TSA's inspectors are properly trained regarding
how to safely inspect an owner/operator's property and the importance
of complying with official safety-related requirements while on the
owner/operator's property. For example, TSA puts its inspectors through
a rigorous training program, incorporating classroom and field
training, so inspectors are knowledgeable on all aspects related to
this regulatory program as well as on safety issues. TSA recognizes the
importance of this training to ensure inspectors avoid danger to
themselves, to workers on the inspected property, to travelers, and to
the inspected property.
Finally, concerning the suggestion that TSA consider an audit
program for contractors, in lieu of making the owner/operator
responsible for ensuring contractor receives training, TSA applies two
important regulatory policies related to responsibilities of
contractors. First, contractors performing measures required under
TSA's rules are ``authorized representatives'' of the regulated
party.\82\ As part of its general enforcement policy, TSA consistently
holds regulated parties responsible for the actions of their authorized
representatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ See the rule's definition of ``authorized representative''
in 49 CFR 1500.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, authorized representatives and other contractors (and their
employees) are also responsible for complying with TSA's regulatory
requirements. Under section 1570.7 of this rule, any person may be
subject to enforcement action for violations of the rule, including
contractors who provide service to owner/operators and the employees of
such contractors. As a result, TSA could pursue an enforcement action
against the regulated party, the regulated party and the contractor as
an authorized representative, or against the contractor.
C. Part 1570--General Rules
1. Terms Used in This Subchapter (Sec. 1570.3)
Comments on definition of ``security-sensitive employees'': In
addition to comments of general support for the definition of security-
sensitive employee, TSA received a few questions about the term. One
commenter sought more information on what defines an employee in a
security-sensitive position, specifically asking whether the definition
includes a cyber-expert or a frontline engineer staffing a commuter
train. Another commenter suggested replacing the term with ``Frontline
Employees'' for consistency with the 9/11 Act, finding the term
``security-sensitive'' to be confusing and therefore subject to
misinterpretation. Further, this commenter found no risk-based
justification for establishing a classification of employees to
determine who should receive security training.
TSA response: As discussed in the NPRM, the definition of
``security-sensitive employees'' includes employees who perform
functions with a direct nexus to, or impact on, transportation security
based on their job functions.\83\ Engineers are specifically covered
within the job functions identified for 49 CFR parts 1580 (freight
railroads) and 1582 (public transportation and passenger railroads). A
cyber-expert may be considered a security-sensitive employee based upon
specific job functions, such as functions involving control or movement
of trains, or because of other cyber-security responsibilities related
to the owner/operators security measures in its security plan to
protect the integrity of its information systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ 81 FR 91333 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA chose the term ``security-sensitive'' for this rule to mirror
the term ``safety-sensitive'' used in rules promulgated by DOT. There
is no statutory requirement for TSA to specifically use the term
``frontline employee,'' as long as the scope of the rule includes the
employees identified in relevant portions of the 9/11 Act, which it
does.
Finally, as discussed in the NPRM,\84\ TSA applied a risk-based
approach to all requirements in this rule, including the definition of
security-sensitive employee. The NPRM explained TSA began with an
analysis of the employees listed in the 9/11 Act's definitions of
``frontline employees'' who must receive training \85\ and then
considered whether other employees may also be in a position to spot
suspicious activity because of where they work, their interaction with
the public, or their access to information. TSA also considered who
needs to know how to report or respond to these potential threats. This
additional group of employees includes managers, supervisors, or others
who perform the function or who so directly supervise the performance
of a function that their nexus to the job function is equivalent to the
employee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ See id. at 61353-61355.
\85\ See id. at Table 6, Comparison of security training NPRM
proposed categories for ``security-sensitive employees'' to 9/11 Act
definitions of ``frontline employees'' who must be trained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Recognition of Prior or Established Security Measures or Programs
(Sec. 1570.7)
Comments related to use of existing training: Several commenters
suggested that TSA should allow use of previous training or programs to
satisfy the rule's requirements. The range of these existing programs
include training provided under TSA's First ObserverTM
program and existing railroad security training, which commenters
assert meets the intent of the 9/11 Act. Commenters noted that both
freight and passenger railroads currently maintain effective security
training programs.
Comments on how to use these existing programs varied, including
allowing owner/operators to amend their existing programs to make them
comply with the rule's requirements; letting currently trained
employees be ``grandfathered'' in as long as their training meets the
rule's requirements; and a request that TSA determine these existing
training programs meet the 9/11 Act's requirements without imposing
additional regulatory requirements.
Finally, a commenter expressed concern that owner/operators will be
allowed to fulfill the training requirements in a variety of ways,
creating unique programs for each system. The commenter noted the
[[Page 16476]]
training requirements may become overly burdensome for employees and
employers if an employee must be re-trained every time he or she leaves
one transportation operation and joins another.
TSA response: Consistent with requirements of the 9/11 Act, the
rule specifically provides for recognition of previous training in
Sec. 1570.107.\86\ Under this section, owner/operators can use
previously provided training meeting or exceeding the requirements of
the rule to the extent they can provide documentation of the training
and validation this training satisfies the requirements applicable to
that employee. The rule also provides owner/operators with the
flexibility to use other training programs addressing some or all of
the same topics to satisfy the regulatory requirements in Sec. Sec.
1580.113(c), 1582.113(c), and 1584.113(c).\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ See id. at 91347 for the discussion on this topic in the
NPRM.
\87\ See id. at 91361-91362.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA recognizes that many of the owner/operators to be regulated by
this rule have taken voluntary actions to raise their security
baseline. TSA applauds these efforts, but also notes that they do not
negate the benefits of this rulemaking. The purpose of this rule is to
solidify the baseline for those that have already implemented security
training programs, and to raise those who have not to a consistent
standard across higher-risk operations. To the extent owner/operators
established security training programs consistent with the 9/11 Act as
a voluntary initiative or implemented use of TSA's First
ObserverTM program,\88\ and continue to provide regular
training to their employees, these efforts should significantly
mitigate any costs for compliance with the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ The First ObserverTM program, previously known
as Operation Secure Transport, has been in use for highway motor
carriers (OTRB owner/operators) and covers the Observe, Assess, and
Respond security training components required by this rulemaking.
TSA credits those OTRB owner/operators who have used the First
ObserverTM program in its RIA (full description in
Section 1.5 of the Final RIA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the provision on use of previous training, in Sec.
1570.107, also addresses concerns about unique training programs and
the impact on employees who change jobs. If the owner/operator can
validate the content and timing of the previous training, the rule
allows this training to be credited towards satisfying the regulatory
requirements. At most, the new employer may need to supplement portions
of previous training to address unique aspects of its own TSA-approved
security training program. This allows the owner/operator to ensure all
of the security-sensitive employees receive training specific to their
operations in order to best mitigate security risks.
3. Submission and Approval (Sec. 1570.109)
Comments on frequency of submitting security training programs to
TSA: Two commenters suggested companies should be permitted to submit
training plans and curriculum only once to TSA, which TSA would store
and review on a yearly basis and make recommended changes based on the
current threat.
TSA response: The rule does not impose a specific schedule for
owner/operators to submit updates to their security programs, such as
an annual update. It does, however, require owner/operators to request
to amend their programs if necessary to reflect changes in ownership or
permanent changes in operations affecting the security training program
or curriculum.\89\ For example, a program may need to be updated if the
owner/operator replaces equipment resulting in instructions conflicting
with the current security training curriculum, or expands operations
into a new commodity with different risks, changes personnel structures
affecting reporting, or begins operations in a new geographical area.
In addition, the final rule narrows the scope of amendments required
for changes to security measures or plans. Recognizing an owner/
operator's security program may include issues not specifically
relevant to the scope of transportation security this rule is intended
to address, the final rule includes a list of the specific type of
measures and program changes triggering the requirement to request an
amendment. TSA may also require owner/operators to amend their plans in
the interest of the public and transportation security.\90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ See Sec. 1570.113 and discussion in section IV.B.1.
\90\ See Sec. 1570.115 and discussion in section IV.B.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on methods for submitting security programs to TSA: A
number of commenters supported submitting training programs to TSA via
electronic means, such as in email on a secured password protected
platform. One commenter also expressed support for the proposed initial
security program submission and approval process, as well as the
amendment approval process.
Two commenters, however, raised concerns with this process,
claiming it is too rigid and cumbersome to be effective. Commenters
noted railroad training programs are robust and adaptable, evolving to
address threats and security concerns. To continue to be effective, the
commenters advocated that they be allowed to update their programs as
needed without TSA approval. They also noted the FRA already oversees
railroad security training programs, and TSA inspectors can review the
same materials. They noted that given their current process, the NPRM
lacked adequate justification for the imposition of a prescriptive
process for submission, review, and approval of training programs
already in effect.
TSA response: In response to concerns regarding form of submission,
TSA intends to allow for electronic submission of required
documentation, consistent with SSI requirements. Relating to the need
for updating programs, the final rule requires owner/operators to adapt
their training materials to address specific threats in the various
modes as they emerge. TSA approval is not required for an update unless
the changes stay in effect for more than 60 days. For example, an
owner/operator may provide additional training to address risks
associated with a city hosting a national special security event. If
the changes are to stay in effect for more than 60 days, the owner/
operator must formally request approval to amend their security
program. As the required content for the required security training is
general operation security, TSA does not anticipate the TSA-approved
security training needing to change significantly in response to a
specific threat.
As to the concern about duplication of effort, TSA may accept all
or portions of an owner/operator's existing security training. Under
Sec. 1570.107, an owner/operator may rely on previous training
provided within the stipulated periods for initial or recurrent
training, as validated by TSA (based on information submitted by the
owner/operator). In addition, the rule provides for owner/operators to
rely on training conducted pursuant to other requirements to satisfy
the rule's security training requirements.\91\ In fact, the rule
specifically references training required by FRA.\92\ In reviewing
material prepared for other requirements, TSA will determine whether
the material adequately addresses security training from TSA's
perspective and reduces the risk of a terrorist-related attack on the
transportation. As previously noted, TSA mitigates concerns about
[[Page 16477]]
duplication of inspections, through the annexes to the DHS/DOT MOU.
These annexes address distinctions between TSA's focus on security and
DOT's focus on safety, as well as coordination on regulatory matters
between TSA and the relevant modal components of DOT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ See Sec. Sec. 1580.113(c), 1582.113(c), and 1584.113(c).
\92\ See Sec. Sec. 1580.113(c) and 1582.113(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, regarding the prescriptive process requirements, TSA
reviewed all requirements in this rule to identify any options to
reduce the burden without undermining the rule's effectiveness or
conflicting with requirements in the 9/11 Act. The 9/11 Act
specifically requires submission of the training programs to DHS for
approval and regular updates.\93\ TSA believes the submission and
approval requirements in Sec. 1570.109 are consistent with this
statutory requirement, provide clear instruction on how this
requirement is to be met, and ensure consistent application of the
rule's requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\93\ 9/11 Act sections 1408(d), 1517(d), and 1534(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Implementation Schedule (Sec. 1570.111)
Comments on initial security training: Several commenters advocated
for the proposed accumulated grace periods, ranging from 90 to 180
days, to allow recently hired employees to work before they complete
the training requirements. One commenter suggested abandoning the
accumulated days concept and replacing it with a requirement for all
employees to receive security training no later than 90 days after
beginning employment. One commenter suggested a method for calculating
date: A day should be based on full-time employment, with each 8-hour
period worked counting as one day. Regarding contractors, the same
commenter suggested the training responsibility should rest with the
contracted company.
Comments also addressed how to regulate temporary and/or part-time
employees. One commenter suggested all drivers, whether employees or
contractors, should be trained. Another commenter explained ``pooling
agreements,'' which allow or require employees from other companies to
operate their equipment, and noted these arrangements should be covered
in the final rule.
TSA response: While TSA appreciates concerns regarding the
implementation schedule for initial training, the 60-day requirement is
set by the statute. As noted in the NPRM, the 9/11 Act requires initial
training within the first 60-days of employment for new employees or
for those transitioning to a covered job function (as identified in
Appendix B to parts 1580 (freight rail), 1582 (PTPR), and 1584
(OTRB).\94\ TSA is not adopting the suggestion of a day equaling an
aggregated 8-hour period. TSA's intent with this rule is to ensure
employee's that are regularly positioned to identify and respond to
security threats are prepared to do so. TSA does not believe that this
priority is served by hourly calculations to determine what constitutes
a day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\ See 81 FR 91347.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As to contractors, TSA consistently applies a policy requiring
regulated parties to accept responsibility for their contractors,
including employees operating under pooling agreements. Any person
working for an owner/operators within the scope of applicability,
performing a security-sensitive position--without regard to primary
employer or full/part-time status--must be trained. In other words, a
pooling agreement does not mitigate the need for security training. The
impact of this policy is more fully discussed under comments related to
49 CFR part 1503.
Finally, TSA is not changing the aggregated employment requirement
in Sec. 1570.111(4) nor the requirement for employees (whether
intermittent or contract) to be trained no later than the 60th day of
aggregated employment performing a security-sensitive function. This
requirement ensures these employees are trained after they are in a
position with a particular owner/operator long enough to gain awareness
of the operations necessary to determine when there is an anomaly that
could constitute a threat.
In response to the comment about all drivers (presumably of OTRBs)
being required to receive training, TSA is limiting it to individuals
with a commercial driver's license to focus on those with a nexus to
security, in other words, those likely to operate a bus to, through, or
from a high-risk location, rather than employees moving a bus across a
yard. While TSA is not currently requiring all drivers to receive the
security training, this does not prevent owner/operators from
voluntarily providing the security training required for security-
sensitive employees to a broader population of employees.
In addition, TSA is developing training materials that can be
consistently used across a particular mode. Use of this material,
coupled with the ability to use previous training, will minimize the
burden of ensuring employees in pooling agreements received adequate
training. Owner/operators can rely on the TSA-provided material to
address most of the requirements and limit their operation-specific
training to procedures unique to their operation, such as points of
contact to report security concerns and emergencies.
Comments on recurrent security training: TSA received a variety of
comments on recurrent training. Some commenters generally supported
annual recurrent training. Other commenters stated they should have
flexibility to self-determine the training schedule for their
employees, as opposed to an adhering to a ``one size fits all''
approach. Some commenters expressed concern with the time frame due to
cost constraints and the practicality of training employees while
simultaneously maintaining service. These commenters suggested longer
time periods between training, such as two or three years. One
commenter highlighted the safety requirements in FRA's rules, which
require training every three years.
TSA response: TSA considered options for recurrent training both
before proposing the requirement in the NPRM and in consideration of
comments submitted on the NPRM. TSA continues to believe in the
importance of recurrent training to meet the purpose of the rule, but
is adjusting the frequency of training in consideration of the
comments. The final rule requires recurrent training once every three
years. If, however, the owner/operator modifies its security program or
plan and those changes affect the responsibilities of specific
security-sensitive employees, based on their position or function in
relation to security program or plan requirements, the affected
employees must receive recurrent training to address the changes within
90 days of implementation of the revisions. This change is consistent
with the requirements for hazardous materials employees under 49 CFR
172.704.\95\ The recurrent training requirements are discussed in more
detail in section II.J.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ In addition, TSA notes that it may order modifications to a
security program or plan, or order additional training, as
necessary. See, e.g., 49 U.S.C. 114(l).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Recordkeeping and Availability (Sec. 1570.121)
Comments: Two commenters said the proposed 5-year record-keeping
requirement would be excessive in duration, costly and burdensome in
administration, and unjustified by any risk-based factors. As an
alternative, they suggested owner/operators should only be required to
retain training from
[[Page 16478]]
the past three years (assuming TSA adopts a 3-year training
requirement).
TSA response: Within the context of an annual recurrent training
requirement, TSA considered modifying the record retention period based
on the comments as three years would provide adequate records of
previous training. The change, however, to recurrent training on a
three-year cycle necessitates maintaining the 5-year retention schedule
in order to ensure that the owner/operator can provide adequate
representation of previous training consistent with recurrent training
requirements as well as any training based on modification to the
owner/operator's security program or plan.
6. Security Coordinator (Sec. 1570.201)
Comments on security coordinator availability: Two commenters
suggested changes to the security coordinator requirements specifically
for railroad companies. First, they suggested TSA only require affected
railroads to maintain a 24/7 communications capability to ensure TSA
can reach the rail security coordinators and designated representatives
for the stated purpose of receiving intelligence information and
coordinating on security practices and procedures.
Second, there was one objection to the proposed requirement for
freight railroad operators to name rail security coordinators (RSC)
``accessible to TSA on a 24-hour a day, 7-day a week basis.'' The
commenter suggests modifying this proposal to require the railroad to
``maintain a 24/7 communications capability to ensure TSA can reach the
RSCs and designated representatives for the stated purpose of receiving
intelligence information and coordinating on security practices and
procedures.''
TSA response: First, TSA is reorganizing the location of the RSC
requirements promulgated in 2008, moving the requirements from 49 CFR
part 1580 to part 1570 (Sec. Sec. 1570.201 and 1570.203) and expanding
applicability of the existing RSC requirement to include bus operations
of public transportation systems and OTRB owner/operators within the
scope of the rule's applicability. TSA neither proposed nor is adopting
any modifications to the RSC requirements as they apply to railroads
and the requirement regarding 24/7 accessibility of security
coordinators.
It is critical for security coordinators to be ``accessible to TSA
on a [24/7] basis'' rather than accepting ``a 24/7 communications
capability [that] can reach the RSCs.'' Although most communication
between TSA and security coordinators may be routine, these individuals
are intended to serve key roles in times of heightened and specific
security threat and incident. During such periods, immediate
communication with the security coordinators may be required to prevent
or mitigate loss of life or severe harm to transportation security. TSA
believes the requirement for security coordinators to be accessible to
TSA on a 24-hour a day, 7-day a week basis is amply justified by
commonly accepted principles of emergency and security management. If
TSA needs to convey extremely time-sensitive security information to a
regulated party, particularly in situations requiring frequent
information updates, the information exchange benefits if there is
continuity in participants. The security coordinator must be in a
position to understand security problems, raise issues with corporate
leadership, and recognize when emergency response action is
appropriate. If the contact changes every time TSA makes a call, the
loss of continuity will undermine the effectiveness of the
communication.
Comments on citizenship requirement for security coordinators: Two
commenters stated disclosing citizenship status is unnecessary and
should not be required. One of the two commenters suggests TSA should
recognize Canadian government security clearances in lieu of requiring
RSC to be citizens of the United States.
TSA response: The rule does not require a rail security coordinator
to be a citizen of the United States. It does however, require each
owner/operator to report the citizen status of individuals it intends
to put forward as its RSC under Sec. 1570.201(d). This requirement is
necessary to meet the 9/11 Act requirement that security coordinators
be U.S. citizens unless TSA determines it is appropriate to waive the
requirement ``based on a background check of the individual and a
review of the consolidated terrorist watchlist.'' \96\ By providing
this information up front, TSA can initiate any additional actions
necessary to comply with this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ See 9/11 Act sections 1512(e)(2) and 1531(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Reporting Significant Security Concerns (Sec. 1570.203)
Comments on mandatory reporting requirement, scope of reporting,
and form of reporting: Several commenters opposed a mandatory reporting
requirement. A few argued the requirements would open up their
companies and employees to liability should an incident occur and an
earlier warning action was not observed. Several other commenters
specifically opposed the 24-hour proposed time limit, stating it was
too short, and some transit agencies may not know what the threat is in
that amount of time.
Commenters also suggested TSA authorize electronic reporting of
significant security concerns to meet the reporting requirements in
Sec. 1580.203. These commenters noted the rail industry has developed
an electronic reporting capability and demonstrated its effectiveness
in three industry-wide exercises.
Finally, a few commenters asked for additional clarity regarding
what ``significant security concern'' entails, and one asked for a list
of examples. One commenter specifically suggested TSA harmonize its
definition of ``security threat'' with the FRA's requirement in 49 CFR
part 239. Several commenters suggested streamlining the requirements.
TSA response: As with the security coordinator requirement, TSA is
reorganizing the location of the reporting significant security
concerns requirements promulgated in 2008 (which were at 49 CFR part
1580), placing the requirement in part 1570 to expand its applicability
to OTRBs and bus operations of public transportation system companies
within the scope of the rule's applicability. As proposed in the NPRM,
TSA is making three primary changes to the current requirement through
this final rule. These changes affect all owner/operators required to
report, but results in a reduced burden for rail operators previously
required to report. First, the rule modifies the current requirement to
report immediately, to allow up to 24 hours to report significant
security concerns. TSA is providing a period of up to 24 hours to
report the information for two reasons: (1) If there is an emergency,
the immediate priority is to notify and work with first responders, not
call TS, and (2) TSA is aware the quality of information provided is
improved when owner/operators have an opportunity to review the
information and ensure it constitutes a valid significant security
concern consistent with the description of activities in Appendix A to
part 1570 before it is reported. TSA believes 24 hours is an adequate
period for this process to work effectively. If more time is granted,
the information may be too stale to be of benefit to TSA or its other
stakeholders.
Second, TSA is modifying the existing requirement to allow for
electronic reporting. The current rule requires reporting to be made by
telephone. With
[[Page 16479]]
this final rule, TSA is expanding the requirement to allow for other
methods prescribed by TSA. TSA will communicate these methods directly
to security coordinators to avoid a situation where a phone number or
email address may become outdated based on changes or requirements
beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
Third, as noted in the NPRM and discussed in section III.C, TSA is
including in the final rule a table that identifies categories of
incidents and provides detailed descriptions.\97\ These incidents are
modified from the requirements promulgated in 2008 to align with other
standards, including those mentioned by commenters, and recommendations
from the Government Accountability Officer (GAO).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\97\ See Appendix A to part 1570. See also 81 FR 91351-91353.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Subpart B--Security Programs
1. Security Training Program General Requirements (Sec. Sec. 1580.113,
1582.113, and 1584.113)
Comment on content creation: TSA received several comments
regarding responsibility for creating training content. TSA also
received questions concerning who will conduct training and the
training format, including recommendations for TSA to consider video
training, in-classroom, and/or field training. Another commenter
suggested putting a one-hour cap on course length. One commenter
suggested an outside entity, not TSA, should provide oversight for
compliance with the training. Several commenters also suggested TSA
should require transit systems, rail carriers and OTRB operators to
seek the input of employees and union representatives as they draft
their training plans, which would ensure the plans consider individual
circumstances and are effective in promoting transportation security.
TSA response: Rather than putting limits on curriculum development,
the rule requires owner/operators to submit their security training
programs to TSA for review and approval. While the burden is on owner/
operators to develop and provide the training, the rule neither
prescribes how the content is to be created nor dictates how it is to
be provided. The flexible requirement is an intentional effort to
address the varied operational issues for owner/operators required to
provide training. For example, larger owner/operators may determine it
is more cost-effective to incorporate the training required by this
rule into existing training provided in a classroom. For smaller
operators, web-based training may be easier.
To address this variety, the rule requires owner/operators to
develop and implement a security training program meeting the
requirements of the relevant subparts and ensures the standards are met
by requiring the program to be submitted to TSA for review and approval
of the curriculum (including lesson plans, objectives, and modes of
delivery) and method for measuring effectiveness.\98\ TSA is unwilling
to put a cap on the requirement. Based on the security awareness
training TSA requires for its own employees as well as its work and
discussions with experts on content development, TSA assumes adequately
addressing all of the required elements will take approximately one
hour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\98\ See Sec. Sec. 1580.113(b)(6), 1582.113(b)(6), and
1584.113(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA is committed to providing maximum flexibility within the
constraints of the 9/11 Act's requirements and needs of regulatory
compliance. To support compliance, TSA intends to provide complimentary
training material satisfying many of the rule's requirements. If owner/
operators choose not to use this material, they will need to develop a
full curriculum to be approved by TSA. If they do use it, they may
still need to submit additional material for any portion of the
required training (based on their unique operations) not covered by the
TSA materials. As a result, the rule provides a process balancing
flexibility (for owner/operators to develop a program specific to their
operational environment) and TSA's need to ensure training programs
meet the rule's purpose.
TSA does not agree with suggestions for third-parties (not TSA) to
oversee the curriculum development and training. In light of the
flexibility given for curriculum development, TSA must ensure the
minimum requirements of the rule are met in order to satisfy both the
mandate of the 9/11 Act and TSA's intent for this rule to provide a
consistent baseline of security training across higher-risk operations.
TSA's subject matter experts for the modes of operation covered by this
rule will lead this review and approval process.
TSA agrees the materials should be relevant to the operational
environment and the employees who work within that environment. Like
other aspects of curriculum development, the rule gives owner/operators
the flexibility necessary to meet this objective without imposing a
prescriptive requirement. Similarly, the rule does not prohibit owner/
operators from consulting with relevant parties or developing programs
appropriate for their operational environment.
Comment on size of train crew: One commenter noted that a two-
person minimum crew in train cabs is vital to defending national
security. Their concerns reflected current operational requirements,
such as monitoring of computer screens rather than monitoring
conditions outside of the train (such as the track).
TSA response: The purpose of this regulation is to ensure employees
performing security-sensitive functions receive adequate training.
Staffing requirements for train operation are beyond the scope of this
rulemaking.
Comments on effectiveness of security training: The rule requires
owner/operators to include in their security training programs a method
for evaluating the effectiveness of the program.\99\ A few commenters
suggested ways to ensure the training is effective and applicable to
real-world situations. Suggestions included having businesses put up a
poster as a general reminder of the material covered in the class,
creating incentives (monetary or time-off awards) to completing
training, and ensuring class is engaging and not only a lecture in a
classroom. Another suggestion was to integrate randomized written tests
or drills of the covered material, of which successful completion could
warrant an award. Comments included suggestions for training to be
conducted in a classroom, citing two benefits of classroom training:
(1) Allows employees to ask questions and learn from questions and
discussions and (2) allows instructors to work with employees through a
variety of scenarios, which would include teaching how to look out for
and spot various security threat and explain the various roles each
employee serves in responding to these threats. One commenter asked
whether the training could be incorporated into ``Entry Level Driver''-
training, and also suggested an online ``train the trainer'' course.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ See Sec. Sec. 1580.113(b)(9), 1582.113(b)(9), and
1584.113(b)(9). See also discussion at II.K.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenters were divided on the question of whether the training's
effectiveness should be documented through testing. Several commenters
stated that classroom testing should be augmented by field testing.
Others suggested no testing should be required. Several commenters
suggested that TSA incorporate efficacy standards or incentives for
public transportation agency employees. As an alternative, a number of
commenters opposed any kind of proficiency testing on the training
course material.
[[Page 16480]]
TSA response: TSA is requiring the owner/operator to describe the
method to be used for measuring effectiveness of security training and
will conduct inspections to ensure the approved method is being used,
as part of implementing the TSA-approved security training program.
While TSA appreciates the information provided by commenters for
measuring the effectiveness of training, TSA has decided not to dictate
which method must be used. As part of its commitment to recognizing the
many unique operational environments for owner/operators subject to
this regulation, as well as the commitment to balance maximum
flexibility with effective security, TSA is not requiring a specific
method for measuring effectiveness.\100\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\100\ For further discussion, see 81 FR at 91361.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA recognizes that pre- and post-testing in a classroom setting is
an efficient way to determine the effectiveness of training. TSA also
acknowledges, however, that, other methods of documenting the
effectiveness of training exist, which may be preferable for some
employees and/or circumstances. Therefore, TSA is not specifying a
particular type of testing or other method for determining
effectiveness, but will use the owner/operator's TSA-approved standard
for measuring effectiveness when inspecting an owner/operator's
training documentation to verify that each employee who must be trained
has received the required training and that the owner/operator has
determined that the training is effective.
2. Security Training and Knowledge for Security-Sensitive Employees
(Sec. Sec. 1580.115, 1582.115, and 1584.115)
Comments on security training knowledge requirements: TSA received
varied comments on the required security training curriculum content
requirements. The comments ranged from asserting that the scope of the
training content is overly broad to proposing additional training
requirements to be added to the rule.
One commenter, concerned that the scope is too broad, suggested
training beyond awareness observation and reporting may be excessive
and counterproductive to the safety and convenience of passengers. The
commenter recommended that security training requirements not exceed
the parameters of the employee's unique tasks or working environment.
Finally, some commenters wanted topics added to the curriculum. Two
commenters suggested the training focus on civil liberties, and
integrate community policing principles. Other proposed topics included
how to respond to an attack, high-jacking, and/or kidnapping scenario;
self-defense training; specified training on high-risk events; training
on accessing and interpreting situations; and development of
communication skills.
Commenters suggested the training address issue of civil rights and
liberties, expressing concerns about training employees to identify
individuals as threats based on their socioeconomic status. One
commenter specifically cautioned against enabling transit security
personnel to profile riders based on race or religion, and suggested
personnel should first be trained to respect rights of all individuals,
and should also be trained in effective measures not involving ``stop
and frisk,'' or similar measures.
TSA response: TSA believes the required security-training topics
(covering prepare, observe, assess, and response) will provide a
baseline of security awareness to enhance the overall safety and
security of passenger and cargo transported by rail and highway. This
type of security awareness does not inconvenience passengers or
undermine their safety. It does, however, enhance passenger security.
Furthermore, nothing in the rule empowers employees to engage in racial
profiling or conduct police operations. TSA will not approve a training
curriculum encouraging employees to conduct racial profiling or report
threats based on socioeconomic status.
Finally, the regulatory requirements for training content provide
flexibility to owner/operators to develop programs appropriate to their
operational environment, including known threats and vulnerabilities.
As a result, training may include how to identify threats such as a
potential hijackers and how to prepare and use the required training
during high-profile events (including appropriate communications with
the public and first responders). The requirements of this rule will
enhance such targeted, optional training. The rule's requirements will
result in employees possessing an understanding of the norm for their
operational environment, the skills and knowledge necessary to identify
anomalies indicating a potential threat, and the capability to respond
appropriately.
Comments on training to satisfy regulatory requirements: Several
commenters requested more specificity regarding what type of training
will satisfy the curriculum requirements, including a list of examples.
One commenter asked for guidance on what type of training will satisfy
the curriculum requirement concerning ``defending oneself.''
TSA response: In the past, TSA has worked with the relevant
associations and FEMA to identify training to address specific security
needs and anticipates continuing to do so as it relates to the
requirements in this rule. In addition, TSA has partnered with national
associations and industry to cooperatively develop security training
curriculum and programs. While TSA does not intend to endorse specific
third-party training programs owner/operators may submit these programs
to TSA as part of their security training programs. TSA will assess all
submitted programs to ensure compliance with the rule's requirements
before approving the training program. As to the comment on providing
more information on ``defending oneself,'' the rule does not require
training on how to use self-defense devices or other protective
equipment provided by the employer. TSA assumes the employer's standard
employee training will address these issues at the time the equipment
is provided (one commenter noted the Occupational Health and Safety
Administration (OSHA) requires employees to receive training in the use
of (PPE) required by their job functions).
Comments on impact of TSA-developed security training materials:
One commenter suggested that TSA develop an annual course based on
current threat and intelligence rather than requiring companies to
create annual plans for TSA approval. Similarly, several commenters
suggested that TSA create a baseline curriculum, such as a video, that
would meet the regulatory requirements. One commenter suggested that
companies could voluntarily submit supplemental training that exceeds
the recommended baseline training that is specific to their mode. One
commenter, however, specifically stated that TSA's First
ObserverTM training materials are inadequate.
TSA response: This rule does not require owner/operators to submit
updated plans every year. Updates, or amendments, are only required for
specific reasons, as discussed in section IV.B.
In regard to the comments regarding use of First
ObserverTM, TSA notes that the First ObserverTM
program most familiar to regulated parties was created primarily for
highway and motor carrier professionals. While TSA assessed that First
ObserverTM covers three of the required training elements
for OTRB owner/operators, the program was not created to specifically
address this rule
[[Page 16481]]
nor was it meant to be applicable to all surface modes of
transportation.
At the time the NPRM was published, TSA anticipated expanding the
First ObserverTM program to incorporate additional training
material. Since publication of the NPRM, however, TSA initiated
development of new materials to address three of the required training
program components (Observe, Assess, and Respond) that are relevant to
all owner/operators within the three covered modes.\101\ While these
videos are a new product intended to specifically align with the rule's
requirements, they build upon previous training developed by TSA under
First ObserverTM and other transportation security-related
training programs. TSA adapted this previously developed information,
and supplemented it as necessary, to ensure the videos address as many
of the required training elements as can be met through a one-size fits
all training video. These materials may eventually be placed under the
First ObserverTM umbrella, but will not be the same as the
original program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\101\ The ``Prepare'' element of the required training
curriculum is, by its nature, specific to each the operations of
each owner/operator covered by the rule. As such, this element
cannot be addressed in material intended to be applicable to
multiple owner/operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted in the NPRM, use of TSA-developed and provided material is
optional. TSA developed these materials to further reduce the burden of
compliance to owner/operators with a resource they may use to meet a
majority of the security training requirements under this rule. These
videos will be made available to all of TSA's surface stakeholders.
TSA is aware that not all owner/operators will choose to use TSA-
provided material, particularly if they are incorporating their
training into existing training programs to meet other Federal, state,
or local training requirements. Owner/operators may need to develop
and/or provide supplemental material to ensure the training provided
meets all of the training requirements, specifically reflecting nuances
within the operations of a particular owner/operator or a particular
sub-set or location of these operations. This additional information
must be identified and included in the security training program
submitted to TSA. As the videos use is not mandatory, the economic
analysis does not account for them when estimating costs of compliance.
E. Freight Rail Specific Issues
1. Applicability of Security Training Requirements (Sec. 1580.101)
Comments: Several commenters expressed concern related to the
designated list of HTUAs in Appendix A to part 1580. One commenter
believed the training is necessary for all frontline employees, not
just those employed by higher-risk operations. Another noted that
improving security at some locations may result in terrorists
redirecting their operations to softer targets not covered under the
rule. The commenter suggested the rule should require security training
at all transportation locations. The commenter specifically recommended
that the rule cover freight, passenger rail, and public transit
systems.
TSA response: As discussed in the NPRM, TSA's risk-based
determinations for applicability are consistent with the focus of the
9/11 Act's requirements on higher-risk operations.\102\ This risk-based
focus is reflected in the statutory requirement for the training to be
provided to frontline employees, not all employees, and placing the
security training requirements within the context of a broader security
program focusing on higher-risk operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\102\ See 81 FR 91355 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While hardening one target could make those with nefarious intent
believe that other targets are more vulnerable, the threat (an
adversary's intent and capability) is only one of the critical factors
affecting risk (which also includes vulnerabilities and consequences).
The risk analysis underlying the applicability for freight railroad is
heavily weighted to address concerns regarding the vulnerabilities and
consequences. TSA determined the highest risk freight railroads are
those designated as Class I, based on their revenue and the Nation's
dependence on these systems to move both freight in support of critical
sectors and passengers. All Class I railroads must provide security
training. Similarly, some shortlines (also known as Class II or Class
III railroads) are higher-risk because of what they transport and where
they transport it. As noted above, and in the NPRM, certain materials
have a higher-risk associated with them based on the potential
consequences should they be released.\103\ The likelihood of
catastrophic consequences is greater in HTUAs. By reducing the
vulnerability through increased security training, the rule's
applicability is intended to reduce the risk for these systems without
increasing the risk for others. Finally, TSA encourages owner/operators
not within the scope of the rule's applicability to use the regulatory
requirements as guidance for voluntarily implementing a security
training program for its security-sensitive and other employees,
whether by using TSA-developed programs or through its own training.
These owner/operators may contact TSA through the numbers and addressed
identified in under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, or through modal
associations (with whom TSA regularly interacts).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Chain of Custody and Control Requirements (Sec. 1580.205)
Comments: Two commenters asserted threat assessments indicate
freight railroads face a lower terrorist threat. The commenters
concluded the transfer of custody procedures should only apply at
elevated or imminent terrorism levels.
TSA response: TSA understands this comment to be about the chain of
custody requirements currently required by 49 CFR 1580.107 and not this
rule's requirements to provide training on the chain of custody
procedures employed by the railroad. For the underlying chain of
custody requirements, this rule merely relocates the requirement within
the CFR; TSA did not propose modifying them. TSA thus considers these
comments pertaining to substantive changes to the chain of custody
requirements as beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Consistent,
however, with the requirements of Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the
Regulatory Reform Agenda (Feb. 24, 2017), TSA is addressing this
comment as a suggested revision to existing regulations.
Under 49 U.S.C. 114(l)(3), TSA is required to consider the
potential impact on security before it rescinds or revises a regulatory
requirement. Transfer of custody requirements are intended to prevent
access by unauthorized persons to railcars loaded with certain
chemicals or materials may constitute an immediate threat to life or
health if released into the environment. TSA does not agree that
transfer of custody procedures should only apply to elevated or
immediate threat risk. The state of the terrorism alert level is not
related to the need to deny unauthorized persons access to railcars
loaded with hazardous materials; unauthorized persons must be denied
access to such railcars at all times. Terrorism alert levels are
increased when there is reason to believe a heightened threat of an
attack exists or may exist. Accessible freight cars containing
hazardous materials may be
[[Page 16482]]
used to mount an attack spontaneously, without elaborate planning or
premeditation on the part of the attacker, and therefore without
warning or reason to elevate the threat level in advance of the attack.
Current ``chain of custody'' requirements accomplish this objective and
are retained in the final rule.
F. Public Transportation and Passenger Railroad Specific Issues
Comments: Several commenters questioned the scope of the rulemaking
in relation to PTPR. Commenters specifically questioned TSA's criteria
for identifying the current PTPR systems, and asked whether TSA will
identify additional PTPR systems in the future. One commenter urged TSA
to reconsider limiting the applicability to 46 systems rather than all
PTPR systems, as the cost-savings is far outweighed by the cost-
effectiveness achieved by meaningful training of all frontline transit
employees in security-sensitive positions. One commenter asked if the
Federal Transit Administration's (FTA's) impending repeal of 49 CFR
part 659 would mean only TSA's identified ``higher risk'' PTPR systems
will have security training requirements, vulnerability assessments,
and security planning requirements after April 15, 2019.
TSA response: As noted above, TSA's risk-based determinations for
applicability are consistent with the 9/11 Act's requirements regarding
higher-risk operations. This focus on risk is reflected in the
statutory requirement for training frontline employees, not all
employees, and placement of the security training requirements within
the context of a broader security program required to focus on higher-
risk operations. In questioning TSA's criteria for its determination,
the commenter provided no specific information regarding TSA's
perceived failures nor provided alternatives. If TSA decides to expand
the rule's applicability to additional systems, it would do so through
appropriate rulemaking procedures consistent with TSA's statutory
authorities and rulemaking requirements.
TSA cannot confirm the rule will continue to be as cost-effective
if the number of PTPR systems is expanded. In the NPRM and Final RIA,
TSA performed an alternatives analysis (Section 5.2 of the Final RIA),
in which one of the alternatives expanded the scope of affected PTPR
owner/operators from 47 (46 PTPR systems + Amtrak) to 253. This
alternative would result in the costs of compliance for the PTPR
industry to increase from $2.44 million to $14.93 million (both
annualized and discounted at 7 percent).\104\ It seems unlikely that
expanding security training to an additional 206 owner/operators, to
include operations not considered higher-risk, will yield a
corresponding reduction in risk. As previously noted, TSA encourages
owner/operators not covered by the rule's applicability to use the
regulatory requirements as guidance for voluntarily implementing a
security training program for its frontline employees, whether by using
TSA-developed programs or through its own training.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ See Final Rule RIA, tables 40 and 91 for total costs to
PTPR in the preferred alternative and Alternative 2 (expanded
population), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the nexus between the FTA's requirements and this rule are
more fully discussed in the NPRM.\105\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\105\ See 81 FR at 91365.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. OTRB Specific Issues
1. Definition of Security-Sensitive Employees (Sec. 1584.3 and
Appendix B to Part 1584)
Comments: Two commenters expressed concern that bus companies do
not always know in advance exactly which buses will be used for which
service. One of the commenters suggested it would be easiest for their
company if all drivers take part in mandatory training, regardless of
their normal scheduled route, as there is potential for a driver to be
transferred to a different assignment at the last minute. Another
commenter cautioned the rule may cause confusion as to which employees
of an operation should be trained, and asked for clarification whether
an operator should only train front line employees servicing identified
destinations. The commenter explained a scheduled service operator may
offer charter, shuttle bus, or other transportation services, in
addition to fixed-route service to areas that are outside the UASI
areas.
TSA response: To address the request for clarity, TSA recommends
owner/operators first determine whether they have operations placing
them within the scope of the rule's applicability, i.e., whether the
owner/operator provides fixed-route service to, through, or from one of
the areas identified in Appendix A to part 1584. If so, the owner/
operator must provide security training to all of its security-
sensitive employees. The question of which employees receive training
is not based on where the employee's job takes them, but what their job
requires them to do. Thus, all employees who have a commercial driver's
license and operate an OTRB for the owner/operator must receive
security training, not just those who drive an OTRB to, through, or
from an identified area.
The comments provided conflicting opinions on whether requiring all
security-sensitive employees to receive the training, regardless of
where the individual operates, is necessary. TSA is requiring that all
security-sensitive employees must be trained, but notes that owner/
operators may request alternative measures under the procedures in
Sec. 1570.117.
2. Applicability (Sec. 1584.101)
Comments on threat: One commenter disagreed that vehicle borne
improvised explosive devices (VBIED) are the greatest and most likely
attack risk, citing recent terrorism-related incidents involving
vehicle ramming.
TSA response: Within the context of the 9/11 Act's mandate for TSA
to require OTRB owner/operators to provide security training to their
employees, TSA's risk analysis focused on what risks were greatest for
OTRB, not all forms of motor vehicles. To the extent the commenter is
suggesting use of an OTRB for vehicle ramming is greater than the risk
of using an OTRB as a VBIED, the distinction would have no impact on
how TSA uses its risk analysis to determine applicability as the
vulnerabilities and consequences for OTRBs are similar. To the extent
the commenter is referring to other types of motor carrier-related
threats, TSA notes that security awareness training is a valuable
countermeasure against vehicle ramming attacks. Because large
commercial vehicles can do more damage in a ramming attack, teaching
large vehicle operators to be more sensitive to and aware of possible
hijacking or other attempts to procure their vehicle can mitigate
losses and damages.
Comments on applicability: Several commenters expressed concern
with the scope and applicability of the rule. One commenter agreed with
the definition of ``higher risk'' and their application to the rule,
but urged TSA to ensure DHS provides consistency throughout all its
components regarding ``the factors that could make an OTRB a potential
target.'' One commenter suggested that UASI may be ``over kill,'' and
suggested only 10 areas. Another expressed concern that as UASI areas
are re-determined annually, the prioritized locations could change
frequently, which would result in an undue burden on operators and
foster soft targets as resources are shifted to address new threats.
Finally, commenters expressed concern that the rule may create ``soft
targets'' which could be exploited by terrorists.
[[Page 16483]]
TSA response: As discussed in the NPRM,\106\ TSA's risk-based
determinations for applicability are consistent with the focus of the
9/11 Act's requirements on higher-risk operations. This is reflected in
the statutory requirement for the training to be provided to frontline
employees, not all employees, and placing the security training
requirements within the context of a broader security program that
focuses on higher-risk operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\106\ See general discussion on applicability, id. at 91355 et
seq. See also OTRB specific discussion, id. at 91358 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While hardening one target could make those with nefarious intent
believe that other targets are more vulnerable, the threat (an
adversary's intent and capability) is only one of the critical factors
affecting risk (which also includes vulnerabilities and consequences).
The risk analysis underlying the applicability for OTRB is heavily
weighted to address concerns regarding the vulnerabilities and
consequences, including the vulnerability associated with scheduled
service and the consequences should an attack occur in highly populated
urban areas.
Because the risk involving an OTRB as a VBIED is primarily to the
targeted urban area, TSA relied on a risk model developed by DHS to
determine highest risk urban areas for the UASI grant program. This
model has been approved by the Secretary of Homeland Security for
calculating the relative risk of urban areas in order to inform UASI
allocation determinations.\107\ As with PTPR, TSA drew the line for
applicability where there is a natural and significant break in the
funding allocations as informed by the risk methodology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\107\ As the risk methodology relies upon SSI, it is not
available to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As to concern about the impact of future changes to UASI
designations, that concern is misplaced. While TSA used the UASI
designations to develop its applicability determination, the term UASI
is not used in the applicability. Instead, the rule applies to those
providing fixed-route service to, through, or from one of the areas
identified in Appendix A to part 1584. The table in this appendix
includes specific counties to avoid any potential confusion regarding
applicability.
Finally, TSA does not believe the regulation creates soft targets.
By reducing the vulnerability through increased security training, the
rule's applicability is intended to reduce the risk for these systems
without increasing the risk for others. Finally, TSA notes that it
encourages owner/operators not covered by the rule's applicability to
use the regulatory requirements as guidance for voluntarily
implementing a security training program for its frontline employees,
whether by using TSA-developed programs or through its own training.
H. Comments Beyond Scope of Rulemaking
TSA received several comments regarding issuance of self-defense
devices, such as tasers and mace, ranging from suggesting that we
require employers to issue them to suggesting that we prohibit it.
Either suggestion is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. The comment
indicating that OSHA mandates employee training in the use of PPE, if
required by their job functions, has already been noted.
VIII. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) requires Federal agencies
to consider the impact of paperwork and other information collection
burdens imposed on the public and, under the provisions of PRA sec.
3507(d), obtain approval from the OMB for each collection of
information it conducts, sponsors, or requires through
regulations.\108\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\108\ Public Law 96-511, 94 Stat. 2812 (Dec. 11, 1980), as
codified at 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB has approved a related information collection request for
contact information for RSCs and alternate RSCs, as well as the
reporting of significant security concerns by freight railroad
carriers, passenger railroad carriers, and rail transit systems.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\109\ See OMB Control No. 1652-0051.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule, however, contains new information-collection
activities subject to the PRA. Accordingly, TSA has submitted the
following information requirements to OMB for its review. The
Supporting Statement for this information collection request is
available in the docket for this rulemaking.
Title: Security Training Programs for Surface Mode Employees.
Summary: This final rule requires the following information
collections:
First, owner/operators identified in 49 CFR 1580.101, 1582.101, and
1584.101 are required to submit a security training program for
security-sensitive employees that meets the requirements of subpart B
of 49 CFR part 1580, subpart B of 49 CFR part 1582, and subpart B of 49
CFR part 1584. Additionally, they are required to submit a request to
amend their security training program if certain changes are made to
their operations or if notified by TSA that an amendment is necessary.
For purposes of its burden estimates, TSA assumes such modification
will occur every three years.
Second, the public transportation bus systems and OTRB owner/
operators to whom the final rule applies would be required to obtain
personal and contact information from their designated security
coordinator, and alternate, and submit such records to TSA.
Third, respondents would be required to retain individual training
records on security-sensitive employees at the location(s) specified in
each respondent's respective security training program, and make such
records available to TSA upon request.
Fourth, the public transportation bus systems and OTRB owner/
operators to whom the final rule applies would be required to report
significant security concerns, which includes incidents, suspicious
activities, and/or threat information.
Use of: This information will be used to support the implementation
of this final rule, including to TSA determinations that security
training programs satisfy the requirements in this final rule.
Recordkeeping requirements are necessary for TSA to verify employee
training is in compliance with the final rule. Security coordinator
information supports respondent communications with TSA concerning
intelligence information, security related activities, and incident or
threat response with appropriate law enforcement and emergency response
agencies. The reporting of significant security concerns supports the
analysis of trends and indicators of developing threats and potential
terrorist activity.
Respondents (including number of): The likely respondents to this
information collection are the owner/operators of covered surface
modes, which are estimated to incur approximately 579,070 responses
over the next 3 years (including 145,731 freight railroad responses;
254,754 PTPR responses; and 178,586 OTRB company responses), which
amounts to an average annual cost of $0.93 million.
Frequency: TSA estimates that following initial submission,
security training programs would need to be periodically updated as
appropriate. Security training records would need to be updated after
each training occurrence. Security coordinator information would need
to be updated as appropriate. Significant security concerns would be
reported as they occur. TSA estimates inspections for
[[Page 16484]]
compliance would occur at a rate of one inspection per year per owner/
operator.
Annual Burden Estimate: The average yearly burden for security
training program development and submission, security coordinator
submission, employee training documentation recordkeeping, and incident
reporting is estimated to be 2,729 hours for freight railroads; 3,311
hours for PTPRs; and 6,278 hours for OTRB companies. The total average
annual time burden estimate is approximately 12,318 hours. Table 5
shows the information collections and corresponding hour burdens for
entities falling under the requirements of the final rule.
Table 5--PRA Hours of Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time per Number of responses Average
Collection response ------------------------------------------------ 3-Year time annual time
(hours) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 burden burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial Security Training Program Development and Submission
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freight Rail............................................ 152 33 0 0 5,016 1,672
PTPR.................................................... 88 47 0 0 4,136 1,379
OTRB (Large to Medium).................................. 44 31 1 1 1,439 480
OTRB (Small)............................................ 28 174 3 3 5,062 1,687
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modified Security Training Program Development and Submission
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freight Rail............................................ 25 30 0 0 743 248
PTPR.................................................... 25 42 0 0 1,058 353
OTRB (Large to Medium).................................. 25 28 1 1 736 245
OTRB (Small)............................................ 25 157 3 3 4,068 1,356
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Security Coordinator Information Submission
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTPR.................................................... 0.5 52 6 6 32 11
OTRB.................................................... 0.5 467 65 66 299 100
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employee Training Documentation Recordkeeping
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freight Rail............................................ 0.017 136,155 4,750 4,764 2,428 809
PTPR.................................................... 0.017 194,219 23,173 23,251 4,011 1,337
OTRB.................................................... 0.017 39,147 5,142 5,206 825 275
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incident Reporting
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTPR.................................................... 0.05 4,652 4,652 4,652 698 233
OTRB.................................................... 0.05 41,881 42,691 43,516 6,404 2,135
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Burden (responses)............................ .............. .............. .............. .............. 579,070 193,023
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Burden (hours)................................ .............. .............. .............. .............. 36,953 12,318
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Economic Impact Analyses
1. Regulatory Impact Analysis Summary
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review,\110\ as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review,\111\ directs each Federal agency to
propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that
the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, E.O.
13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,\112\
requires agencies to identify at least two regulations to be eliminated
for every new regulation, and also requires that the cost of planned
regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting
process. Third, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 \113\ requires
agencies to consider the economic impact of regulatory changes on small
entities. Fourth, the Trade Agreement Act of 1979 \114\ prohibits
agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to
the foreign commerce of the United States. Fifth, UMRA requires
agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and
other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more annually (adjusted for inflation).\115\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\110\ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
\111\ 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011).
\112\ 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017).
\113\ Public Law 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164 (Sept. 19, 1980) as
codified at 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
\114\ Public Law 96-39, 93 Stat. 144 (July 26, 1979), codified
at 19 U.S.C. 2531-2533.
\115\ Supra n. 63.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13711 Assessments
Under the requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563,
agencies must assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts,
and equity). These requirements were supplemented by Executive Order
13563, which emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. Under Executive Order 13711, Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs,\116\ agencies must identify whether a
[[Page 16485]]
rulemaking is a regulatory or deregulatory action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\116\ 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In conducting these analyses, TSA has determined:
1. This rulemaking is a significant regulatory action within the
meaning of Executive Order 12866 and a regulatory action under
Executive Order 13771. TSA has determined that this rulemaking is not
economically significant. The rule will not result in an effect on the
economy of $100 million or more in any year of the analysis. The total
annualized costs of the final rule over a perpetual time period using a
7 percent discount rate, in 2016 dollars, and discounted back to 2016
is $5.28 million. The rule will not adversely affect the economy,
interfere with actions taken or planned by other agencies, or generally
alter the budgetary impact of any entitlements.
2. TSA prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA),
which finds that this rulemaking would likely have a regulatory cost
that exceeds one percent of revenue for 47 small entities--1 freight
rail and 46 OTRB owner/operators--of the total 200 small entities that
would be regulated by the final rule.
3. This rulemaking would not constitute a barrier to international
trade.
4. This rulemaking does not impose an unfunded mandate on State,
local, or tribal governments, or on the private sector under UMRA.
In the NPRM RIA, TSA estimated that the rule would cost $157.27
million over ten years, discounted at 7 percent. In the Final RIA, TSA
updated its benefit-cost analysis and estimated this regulation will
cost $52.30 million over ten years, discounted at 7 percent. The change
in cost estimate from the NPRM RIA to the Final RIA is due to the
following:
The final rule will require affected surface mode
employees to undergo security training at least once every three years,
which is a change in frequency from the annual training requirement in
the NPRM. TSA updated training burden cost estimates to reflect the
final rule's triennial training cycle.
TSA updated employee population estimates in each of the
three industries regulated by this final rule. In all three modes, the
final rule employee population estimates decreased from the estimates
in the NPRM: (1) The population of impacted freight rail employees
decreased based on an updated source.\117\ (2) The population of
impacted PTPR employees decreased as a result of TSA using more
detailed population data in this Final RIA, as well as an update in the
percentage of employees performing security-sensitive roles. (3) The
population of impacted OTRB employees decreased as a result of
reevaluating the population of impacted OTRB owner/operators from the
NPRM dataset. TSA made revisions based on new information about the
owner/operator's operations (such as the lack of scheduled services),
as well as the consolidation and closure of owner/operators within the
industry. This re-evaluation resulted in eight fewer OTRB owner/
operators than previously estimated in the NPRM, which in turn meant
fewer employees were impacted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\117\ The Final RIA used the 2017 version of ``AAR Railroad
Facts'' versus the 2014 version used in the NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA updated its estimates of compensation rates, employee
turnover rates, and various other inputs. TSA has reviewed all the
inputs used in the NPRM RIA and updated them to ensure that the Final
RIA uses the most recently available data.
TSA added the cost for owner/operators to develop their
own training programs in its primary cost analysis; in the NPRM RIA,
only Alternative 2 made this assumption. In the primary cost analysis
of the NPRM RIA, TSA assumed owner/operators would use a video provided
by TSA, free of charge, to meet a majority of the training
requirements. TSA still plans to make this video available, however for
the purpose of presenting the full range of possible costs for owner/
operators from the final rule, TSA decided to include the cost of
developing a custom training program in the Final RIA. Because of this
change, TSA increased the time burden for owner/operators to develop a
training program. TSA also increased the time burden for TSA to review,
modify, and re-review these programs. Lastly, TSA increased its
estimate of hours spent per inspection because TSA believes
Transportation Security Inspectors will need more time to inspect
owner/operators on the particulars of their unique training program.
TSA revised its assumption that owner/operators will, on
average, update their training program every five years (as assumed in
the NPRM RIA) to every three years. TSA made this change because it
better aligns with the new assumption that owner/operators would create
their own training program. TSA assumes a custom training program would
involve more owner/operator-specific circumstantial changes and those
would occur, on average, more often. This change increased the
estimated cost to owner/operators and TSA because they will,
respectively, submit and review training programs more frequently
within a ten-year period.
TSA added the cost for a name check of new security
coordinators against its Terrorist Screening Database. This cost is
absorbed by TSA, not owner/operators nor the security coordinators.
TSA revised its time burden estimate for recordkeeping
from 15 seconds to 1 minute. This more closely aligns to previous
estimates TSA has made for other employee-specific recordkeeping
requirements.
Table 6 shows the cost components that TSA expects industry and
Government will incur from implementing the final rule. This table
compares these cost components to their respective estimates in the
NPRM and describes the changes made from the original analysis.
[[Page 16486]]
Table 6--10-Year Total Cost of NPRM vs Final Rule
[Discounted at 7 percent, in $ thousands]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM and FR comparison Significant change
Requirements Section ------------------------------------------------ Description from NPRM to final
NPRM Final rule Difference rule
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Training Cost...................... 1580.113, 1582.113, $152,277 $43,429 ($108,848) Requirement to train Changed cost estimate
and 1584.113. security-sensitive to reflect three-
employees on year training cycle.
required elements Updated and refined
(one of the elements population data of
is expanded for security-sensitive
freight rail) of employees. Overall
security training. estimate of affected
employees decreased
from the NPRM.
Training Plan...................... 1570.109............. 1,653 4,372 2,718 Requirement to submit Added the cost for
a training program creating custom
to TSA. Costs training plans; TSA
include planning, previously, assumed
drafting, review and they would use the
submission. TSA-provided video.
Security Coordinator............... 1570.201............. 77 48 (29) Requirement to assign Added the TSA cost to
a security perform a name check
coordinator and an of new security
alternate to serve coordinators against
as a security the Terrorist
liaison with TSA. Screening Database.
Costs include
initial and updated
submissions from
security coordinator
turnover.
Incident Reporting................. 1570.203............. 2,052 2,404 353 Requirement to report Included additional
significant security post-call
concerns within 24 administrative costs
hours of initial for TSA.
discovery. TSA
assumes incident
reporting will occur
telephonically.
Recordkeeping...................... 1570.121............. 592 875 283 Requirement to (1) Decreased cost
maintain security associated with
training records for number of records
each individual due to reduced
trained. These frequency of
records may be training and (2)
stored either increased the time
electronically or burden per record
printed on paper and from 15 seconds to 1
filed. minute. This
estimate is also
more aligned with
previous estimates
TSA made for
recordkeeping of
other vetting
programs.
Inspections........................ 1570.9............... 622 1,175 553 Availability for No significant
inspection by TSA changes. Cost
for compliance with difference due to
the final rule. updates in wages and
Costs assume annual population
inspections for each estimates.
owner/operator;
industry cost to
prepare for and host
TSA inspections. and
presentation of
training records and
program curriculum
when requested by
TSA during
inspection.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Costs.................... ..................... 157,274 52,303 (104,971)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA has prepared an analysis of its estimated costs and benefits,
summarized in the following paragraphs. The OMB Circular A-4 Accounting
Statement for this final rule is in section VIII.B.3. When estimating
the cost of a rulemaking, agencies typically estimate future expected
costs imposed by a regulation over a period of analysis. For this
rule's period of analysis, TSA uses a 10-year period of analysis to
estimate the initial and recurring costs of the regulated surface mode
owner/operators and new owner/operators that are expected due to
industry growth.
TSA concluded the following about the current, or baseline,
training
[[Page 16487]]
environment for freight rail, public transportation and passenger
railroad (PTPR), and OTRB employees (see section 1.8 of the RIA placed
in the docket for further detailed information on the current
baseline):
There are 574 U.S. freight rail owners/operators and are composed
of 7 Class I, 21 Class II, and 546 Class III railroads.\118\ A total of
33 (7 Class I, 8 Class II, and 18 Class III) out of the 574 U.S.
freight rail owner/operators carry RSSM through an HTUA and would be
affected by the final rule.\119\ These 33 freight rail owner/operators
provide security awareness \120\ and chain of custody and control \121\
trainings to their employees. These trainings address two of the
required elements of security training required by the final rule in
Sec. 1580.115 (Security training and knowledge for security-sensitive
employees: Prepare and Assess). Additionally, freight rail owner/
operators are already required to comply with the requirements to
assign security coordinators and report significant security concerns
to TSA under current 49 CFR 1580. Table 7 below identifies the
requirements of the final rule implemented by freight rail owner/
operators. The check marked items in the table represent existing
requirements under PHMSA's regulations (see 49 CFR 172.704 and
1580.107) and, therefore, do not represent additional burden to the
freight rail owners/operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\118\ AAR, ``Railroad Facts, 2017 Edition,'' at pg.3 (2017).
\119\ TSA used its railcar tracking system that monitors toxic
inhalant hazard cars, the Rail Asset Integrated Logistics System,
(RAILS), to identify freight rail owner/operators that transported
one or more shipments of RSSM during the period in calendar year
2017.
\120\ As required by PHMSA. See 49 CFR 172.704.
\121\ In place because of the chain of custody requirement in 49
CFR 1580.107.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MR20.002
There are nearly 6,800 public transportation organizations in the
United States.\122\ Of these, 47 PTPR owner/operators \123\ fall within
the applicability of the final rule. Twenty-four of these 47 PTPR
owner/operators effectively provide training to their employees on
security awareness and employee- and company-specific security programs
and measures.\124\ This training address two of the required elements
of security training required by the final rule in Sec. 1582.115
(Prepare and Assess). Additionally, 24 PTPR owner/operators with rail
operations are already required to comply with the requirements to
assign security coordinators and report significant security concerns
to TSA under current 49 CFR part 1580. Table 8 below identifies the
requirements of the final rule already implemented by PTPR owner/
operators. The check marked items in the table represent existing
requirements under 49 CFR part 1580 and, therefore do not represent
additional burden to the freight rail owners/operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\122\ APTA, ``2016 Public Transportation Fact Book'' (Feb.
2017), available at https://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/FactBook/2016-APTA-Fact-Book.pdf.
\123\ TSA elicited and used input from SMEs in its Surface
Division, combined with data from the Federal Transit
Administration's (FTA) National Transit Database (NTD) to identify
the 47 PTPR owner/operators.
\124\ Agencies identified using latest evaluation from TSA's
BASE assessment. Information on BASE assessment can be found at:
https://www.tsa.gov/news/top-stories/2015/09/21/transit-agencies-earn-high-ratings-through-base-program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 16488]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MR20.003
There are 2,990 U.S. companies in the motorcoach industry.\125\ Of
these, 205 \126\ fall within the applicability of the final rule. Three
of the 205 are large OTRB companies that currently use the TSA-supplied
First ObserverTM program, which covers a majority of the 9/
11 Act security training requirements, to train their employees. This
training addresses three of the security training elements of this
final rule (Observe, Assess, and Respond). Table 9 identifies the
requirements of this final rule implemented by OTRB owner/operators.
The check marked items in the table represent the training components
already covered by the First ObserverTM program and,
therefore do not represent additional burden to the OTRB owners/
operators currently using this program compared to the ``no-action''
baseline.\127\ In Appendix A of the RIA, however, TSA has also
monetized the cost of their current participation in First
ObserverTM. TSA estimated this cost at $0.57 million to
these owner/operators over 10 years (discounted at 7 percent).\128\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\125\ American Bus Association Foundation, ``Motorcoach Census
2015'' (Oct. 9, 2017), available at https://www.buses.org/assets/images/uploads/pdf/Motorcoach_Census_2015.pdf.
\126\ TSA relied on a variety of sources to identify the 205
owner/operators: Intercity Bus Security Grant Program (IBSGP)
applications submitted to FEMA and reviewed by TSA, the American
Intercity Bus Riders Association (AIBRA) intercity bus service
operator list, consultations with ABA, and internet research of
websites like GotoBus.com and other publicly available sources of
information.
\127\ OMB, ``Circular A-4,'' at 2, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/regulatory_matters_pdf/a-4.pdf. (``Benefits and costs are defined in
comparison with a clearly stated alternative. This normally will be
a `no action' baseline: What the world will be like if the proposed
rule is not adopted.'')
\128\ OMB also requires TSA to consider a ``pre-statute''
baseline. Id. at 16. Costs of First ObserverTM have
accrued since passage of the 9/11 Act and are part of this ``pre-
statute'' baseline.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MR20.004
TSA summarizes the costs of the final rule to be borne by four
affected parties: freight railroad owner/operators, PTPR owner/
operators, OTRB owner/operators, and TSA. As displayed in Table 10, TSA
estimates the 10-year total cost of this final rule to be $73.17
million undiscounted, $62.82 million discounted at 3 percent, and
$52.30 million discounted at 7 percent. The costs to industry (all
three surface modes) comprise approximately 96.2 percent of the total
costs of the rule; and the remaining costs are incurred by TSA.
Table 10--Total Cost of the Final Rule by Entity
[$ millions]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total final rule cost
-----------------------------------------------
Year Freight rail PTPR OTRB TSA Discounted at Discounted at
Undiscounted 3% 7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 $8.82 $5.74 $2.28 $0.63 $17.46 $16.95 $16.32
2 0.31 0.67 0.42 0.21 1.60 1.50 1.39
3 0.31 0.67 0.42 0.21 1.61 1.47 1.31
[[Page 16489]]
4 8.08 4.49 2.02 0.27 14.87 13.21 11.34
5 0.58 1.10 0.56 0.22 2.46 2.12 1.75
6 0.58 1.11 0.57 0.22 2.48 2.07 1.65
7 7.64 3.82 1.91 0.28 13.65 11.10 8.50
8 0.82 1.41 0.68 0.23 3.14 2.48 1.83
9 0.83 1.42 0.69 0.23 3.17 2.43 1.72
10 7.25 3.35 1.85 0.29 12.74 9.48 6.48
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Total 35.21 23.78 11.40 2.78 73.17 62.82 52.30
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Annualized .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 7.36 7.45
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
TSA estimates the 10-year costs to the freight railroad industry to
be $35.21 million undiscounted, $30.18 million discounted at 3 percent,
and $25.09 million discounted at 7 percent, as displayed by cost
categories in Table 11.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MR20.005
TSA estimates the 10-year costs to the PTPR industry to be $23.78
million undiscounted, $20.48 million discounted at 3 percent, and
$17.12 million discounted at 7 percent, as displayed by cost categories
in Table 12.
[[Page 16490]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MR20.006
TSA estimates the 10-year costs to the OTRB industry to be $11.40
million undiscounted, $9.74 million discounted at 3 percent, and $8.06
million discounted at 7 percent, as displayed by cost categories in
Table 13.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MR20.007
TSA estimates the 10-year costs to TSA to be $2.78 million
undiscounted, $2.41 million discounted at 3 percent, and $2.03 million
discounted at 7 percent, as displayed by cost categories in Table 14.
[[Page 16491]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MR20.008
This final rule will enhance surface transportation security by
reducing the risk of terrorist attacks in four ways. First, the rule
ensures employees on the frontline of higher-risk surface
transportation systems and operations (defined as ``security-sensitive
employees'') are trained on how to observe, assess, and respond to a
security threat, enhancing their capabilities to take appropriate
actions and mitigate the consequences of any threat or incident.
Second, security-sensitive employees with responsibilities under their
employer's security plan or for specific security measures will be
prepared through training to perform any actions associated with that
responsibility. Third, there will be more effective communication
between TSA and all higher-risk operations through the designation of
security coordinators by all higher-risk operations. Finally, the
expanded scope of owner/operators required to report significant
security concerns will enhance TSA's ability to identify risks and
recommend appropriate actions based on a more comprehensive picture of
threats to surface transportation security.
While training and the other requirements of this final rule are
not absolute deterrents for terrorists intent on carrying out attacks
on surface modes of transportation, TSA expects the probability of
success for such attacks to decrease when the requirements of this rule
are fully implemented.
TSA uses a break-even analysis to frame the relationship between
the potential benefits of the final rule and the costs of implementing
the rule. When it is not possible to quantify or monetize a majority of
the incremental benefits of a regulation, OMB recommends conducting a
threshold, or ``break-even'' analysis. According to OMB Circular No. A-
4, ``Regulatory Analysis,'' such an analysis answers the question ``How
small could the value of the non-qualified benefits be (or how large
would the value of the non-quantified costs need to be) before the rule
would yield zero net benefits?'' \129\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\129\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To conduct the break-even analysis, TSA evaluates three composite
scenarios for each the three modes covered by the final rule. For each
scenario, TSA calculates a total monetary consequence from an estimated
statistical value of the human casualties and capital replacement
resulting from the attack (see Section 4.3 of the Final RIA for a more
detailed description of these calculations; however, many assumptions
regarding specific terrorist attacks scenarios are SSI and cannot be
publicly released).
Table 15 presents the composite or weighted average of direct
consequences from a successful attack on each mode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\130\ As explained in the Final RIA, available in the docket, to
monetize injuries, TSA used two approaches (depending on whether the
injury was due to exposure to hazardous chemicals). To monetize
``non-chemical'' injuries, TSA uses guidance from the Department of
Transportation for valuing injuries based on the Abbreviated Injury
Scale. To monetize chemical-related injuries, TSA obtained
information on the cost of medical treatment for poisoning injuries.
\131\ Total Direct Consequences = (Deaths x $9.6 million VSL) +
(Severe injuries x $2.55 million) + (Moderate injuries x $0.45
million) + (Severe chemical injuries x $43,743) + (Moderate chemical
injuries x $1,687) + Public property loss + Private property loss +
Rescue and clean-up cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 16492]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23MR20.009
TSA compared the estimated direct monetary costs of an attack to
the annualized cost (discounted at 7 percent) to industry and TSA from
the final rule for each mode to estimate how often an attack of that
nature would need to be averted for the expected benefits to equal
estimated costs. Table 16 presents the results of the break-even
analysis for each mode. For example, Table 16 shows that if the freight
rail training requirements in this rule prevents one freight rail
terrorist attack every 141 years, this rule ``breaks-even'' (the
benefits equal the costs).
The break-even analysis does not include the difficult-to-quantify
indirect costs of an attack or the macroeconomic impacts that could
occur due to a major attack. In addition to the direct impacts of a
terrorist attack in terms of lost life and property, there are other
more indirect impacts that are difficult to measure. As noted by Cass
Sunstein in Laws of Fear, ``. . . fear is a real social cost, and it is
likely to lead to other social costs.'' \132\ In addition, Ackerman and
Heinzerling state ``. . . terrorism `works' through the fear and
demoralization caused by uncontrollable uncertainty.'' \133\ As
devastating as the direct impacts of a successful terrorist attack can
be in terms of the immediate loss of life and property, avoiding the
impacts of the more difficult to measure indirect effects are also
substantial benefits of preventing a terrorist attack.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\132\ Cass R. Sunstein, Laws of Fear at 127 (2005).
\133\ Frank Ackerman and Lisa Heinzerling, Priceless On Knowing
the Price of Everything and the Value of Nothing at 136 (2004).
Table 16--Break-Even Analysis Results
[$ millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted average Annualized cost
Modes direct costs of a of the final rule Breakeven averted attack
successful attack at 7% frequency
a b c = a / b
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freight Rail............................... $505.87 $3.60 One attack every 141 years.
PTPR....................................... 487.80 2.48 One attack every 197 years.
OTRB....................................... 371.00 1.37 One attack every 271 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
3. OMB A-4 Statement
The OMB A-4 Accounting Statement (in Table 17) presents annualized
costs and qualitative benefits of the final rule.
[[Page 16493]]
Table 17--OMB A-4 Accounting Statement
[in $ millions, 2017 dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Primary estimate Minimum Maximum Source citation
estimate estimate (Final RIA,
preamble, etc.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits ($ millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized monetized benefits N/A N/A N/A N/A Final RIA
(discount rate in
parentheses).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unquantified benefits......... The requirements proposed in this rule produce benefits by Final RIA
reducing security risks through training security-sensitive
surface mode employees to identify and/or mitigate an
attempted terrorist attack.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs ($ millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized monetized costs (7%) $7.45 .............. .............. Final RIA
(discount rate in (3%) $7.36
parentheses).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized quantified, but 0 0 0 Final RIA
unmonetized, costs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qualitative costs N/A Final RIA
(unquantified).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized monetized N/A N/A N/A Final RIA
transfers: ``on budget''.
From whom to whom?............ N/A N/A N/A None
Annualized monetized N/A N/A N/A Final RIA
transfers: ``off-budget''.
From whom to whom?............ N/A N/A N/A None
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Miscellaneous analyses/ Effects Source citation
category. (NPRM RIA,
preamble, etc.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effects on State, local, and/ None Final RIA
or tribal governments.
Effects on small businesses... Prepared FRFA FRFA (Chapter 6
RIA)
Effects on wages.............. None None
Effects on growth............. None None
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Alternatives Considered
In addition to the final rule, TSA also considered two alternative
policies. In comparison to the final rule, the first alternative
(Alternative 1) removes requirements for recordkeeping, security
incident reporting, and security coordinators for bus-only PTPR owner/
operators. This alternative also removes the requirement to train
freight railroad security-sensitive employees on chain of custody and
control requirements.\134\ The second alternative (Alternative 2)
increases the training frequency to an annual basis and expands the
population of owners/operators to all who operate within any UASI,
which includes the entire metropolitan statistical area.\135\ All other
requirements remain the same.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\134\ Table 64 in the RIA found in the docket provides a
section-by section analysis of which regulatory provisions are
statutorily required and which provisions are discretionary.
\135\ As previously noted, see section VII.C.4. of the preamble
to this final rule, TSA proposed an annual recurrent training
requirement in the NPRM. See also 81 FR at 91348. For the NPRM, TSA
also considered an alternative to ``train security-sensitive
employees once every three years using TSA-provided materials. Id.
at 91379. In response to comments, TSA is adopting a three-year
recurrent training cycle for purposes of the final rule, making the
annual recurrent training requirement the alternative considered for
purposes of the alternatives analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Though not the least costly option, TSA selects the requirements in
this final rule as the preferred alternative. TSA rejected Alternative
1 because it omitted the following important security measures TSA
proposed in the NPRM: (1) Recordkeeping requirements to ensure TSA can
determine compliance (all modes), (2) expanding security coordinator
requirements to provide a security point of contact for bus-only
operations (PTPR), (3) expanding reporting requirements for security
incidents to ensure TSA has a more complete picture of potential
threats to surface transportation (PTPR and OTRB); and (4) ensuring
freight railroad security-sensitive employees with responsibilities
under TSA's chain of custody and control requirements have the
necessary training to ensure compliance with these security measures in
place since promulgation of TSA's Rail Security Rule.\136\ By including
these security measures, TSA can ensure compliance with the rule,
obtain a complete picture of potential threats to surface
transportation across multiple modes, and enhance compliance with
security measures required for freight railroads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\136\ 73 FR 72129, 72130-72179 (Nov. 26, 2008). ``Rail
Transportation Security; Final Rule.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA also rejected Alternative 2. As discussed in the NPRM, TSA
applied a risk-based approach to determining applicability of this
final rule.\137\ Expanding the population would be inconsistent with
TSA's commitment to risk-based security.\138\ TSA is also rejecting
requiring annual recurrent training in response to comments
[[Page 16494]]
received on the NPRM.\139\ In response to these comments which
suggested longer time periods between training, TSA modified the
recurrent training requirement to at least once every three years in
the final rule, and rejected the annual recurrent training requirement
in Alternative 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\137\ See supra n. 13.
\138\ Id..
\139\ See section VI.C.4 of this final rule.
Table 18--Comparison of Costs Between Alternatives
[in millions]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-Year costs (in $ millions) at a 7% discount
Initial Affected population rate
(number of owner/operators) Requirements -----------------------------------------------
Industry TSA Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Rule............................... 33 Freight Rails........... 1. Provide security training to $50.28 $2.03 $52.30
47 PTPRs................... security-sensitive employees
205 OTRBs.................. once every three years.
........................... 2. Designate a security
coordinator (expanded
requirement to include bus-only
PTPR and OTRB).
........................... 3. Report significant security
incidents to TSA (expanded
requirement to include bus-only
PTPR and OTRB) Maintain
employee training records and.
........................... 4. Provide access to TSA and
proof of compliance.
Alternative 1............................ ........................... 1. Provide security training to 48.03 0.99 49.02
security-sensitive employees
once every three years (except
for Chain of custody and
control);.
........................... 2. Designate a security
coordinator (expanded
requirement limited to OTRB).
........................... 3. Maintain employee training
records and.
........................... 4. Provide access to TSA and
proof of compliance.
Alternative 2............................ 69 Freight Rails........... 1. Provide annual security 219.54 4.52 224.05
253 PTPRs.................. training to security-sensitive
403 OTRBs.................. employees within expanded
applicability.
........................... 2. Designate a security
coordinator.
........................... 3. Report significant security
incidents to TSA.
........................... 4. Maintain employee training
records and.
........................... 5. Provide access to TSA and
proof of compliance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
5. Regulatory Flexibility Assessment
The RFA \140\ requires agencies to consider the impacts of their
rules on small entities. TSA performed a Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA) to analyze the impact to small entities affected by the
final rule.\141\ The RFA analysis presented below is a summary of the
FRFA, including the six elements in 5 U.S.C. 604.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\140\ See supra n. 113.
\141\ See Chapter 6 of the Final RIA in the docket for the full
FRFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. A Statement of the Need for, and Objectives of, the Rule.
Sections 1408, 1517, and 1534 of the 9/11 Act require TSA to issue a
security training rule requiring owner/operators of various modes of
surface transportation to provide training to frontline employees of
freight rail, PTPR, and OTRB employees. Owner/operators are required to
submit a training program to TSA for review that will be marked SSI. An
owner/operator must also keep records of whether each employee has
successfully completed their training. Additionally, TSA will collect
security coordinator and alternate coordinator information from
entities covered in the final rule, as well as require reporting of
suspicious activities or incidents by these owner/operators. TSA
requests this information from owner/operators to be better prepared to
respond to emergencies or incidents and to have designated points of
contacts with covered entities when information needs to be shared or
retrieved. TSA requests reporting of security-related incidents and
suspicious activities to assess if there is a new threat or increased
threat to the surface modes of transportation.
b. A Statement of the Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments
in Response to the IRFA, a Statement of the Assessment of the Agency of
Such Issues, and a Statement of Any Changes Made in the Proposed Rule
as a Result of Such Comments. The public did not submit significant
comments during the comment period specifically on the IRFA. However,
elsewhere in in the preamble of the final rule, TSA answered public
comments on the cost estimate of the rule.
c. Description of and an Estimate of the Number of Small Entities
to Which the Rule Will Apply or an Explanation of Why No Such Estimate
is Available. Under the RFA, the term ``small entities'' comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and small
governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
Individuals and States are not considered ``small entities'' based on
the definitions in the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601).
The PTPR owner/operators affected by this final rule are not
considered small entities because they are either owned/operated by
governmental jurisdictions that exceed the RFA population threshold of
50,000 or a
[[Page 16495]]
business that exceeds the Small Business Administration's (SBA) size
threshold. Only freight rail and OTRB owner/operators have small
entities affected by the final rule.
The final rule requires security training for Class I freight rail
owner/operators and freight rail owner/operators that transport RSSM in
one or more HTUAs \142\ or host high-risk passenger rail operations on
their tracks. TSA identified 33 freight railroad entities affected by
the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\142\ See Appendix A to part 1580 of this final rule for list of
HTUAs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA uses the SBA size standards to identify that 18 of the 33
freight rail owner/operators affected by the final rule are considered
a small business. TSA calculates that final rule's requirements are
estimated to cost $61.82 per employee and $18,390.32 per freight rail
owner/operator. Of these 18 small freight rail owner/operators, TSA
estimates that one of these freight rail owner/operators would likely
have a regulatory cost that exceeds one percent of their revenue. Table
19 presents the likely distribution of costs for small freight rail
owner/operators.
Table 19--Costs as a Percent of Revenue for Small Freight Rail Owner/
Operators
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Percent of
Revenue impact range entities entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0% < Impact <= 1%....................... 17 94
1% < Impact <= 3%....................... 0 0
3% < Impact <= 5%....................... 1 6
5% < Impact <= 10%...................... 0 0
Above 10%............................... 0 0
-------------------------------
Total............................... 18 100.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSA identified 205 OTRB owner/operators entities affected by the
final rule. Using SBA's size threshold, TSA estimates that 182 OTRB
owner/operators regulated by the final rule are considered a small
business. TSA calculates that the final rule's requirements are
estimated to cost $35.68 per employee and $5,759.94 per entity to these
OTRB owner/operators. Using a relevant sample of these 143 small OTRB
owner/operators, TSA estimates that 32% of them would likely have a
regulatory cost that exceeds one percent of their revenue. Table 20
presents the likely distribution of costs for this sample of small OTRB
owner/operators.
Table 20--Costs as a Percent of Revenue for Small OTRB Owner/Operators
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Percent of
Revenue impact range entities entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0% < Impact <= 1%....................... 97 68
1% < Impact <= 3%....................... 36 25
3% < Impact <= 5%....................... 6 4
5% < Impact <= 10%...................... 4 3
Above 10%............................... 0 0
-------------------------------
Total............................... 143 100.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. The Response of the Agency to Any Comments Filed by the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in Response
to the Proposed Rule, and a Detailed Statement of Any Change Made to
the Proposed Rule in the Final Rule as a Result of the Comments. The
Small Business Administration did not submit any comments during the
comment period for the NPRM.
e. A Description of the Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and
Other Compliance Requirements of the Final Rule, Including an Estimate
of the Classes of Small Entities that Will Be Subject to the
Requirement and the Type of Professional Skills Necessary for
Preparation of the Report or Record. This final rule's reporting,
recordkeeping and other compliance requirements will include submission
of security training programs, security coordinator and security
incident information, retention of training records, and availability
for compliance inspections. TSA assumes that any training program,
incident report, security coordinator package, or other information
submitted to TSA will be completed by management-level personnel. TSA
also assumes that owner/operators will have a manager prepare before a
TSA compliance inspection. TSA assumes the recordkeeping requirements
of the final rule will be fulfilled by employees with administrative
and clerical skills.
f. A Description of the Steps the Agency has Taken to Minimize
Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities Consistent with the
Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes, including a Statement of the
Factual, Policy, and Legal Reasons for Selecting the Alternative
Adopted in the Final Rule and Why Each of the Other Significant
Alternatives to the Rule Considered by the Agency which Affect the
Impact on Small Entities was Rejected. TSA will allow owner/operators
to develop their own training programs (which must receive TSA
approval). TSA will give owner/operators the flexibility to use
different training materials to satisfy the final rule's training
requirements. Additionally, in an effort to create a baseline for
security training and minimize costs on regulated owner/operators, TSA
will provide training videos to incorporate the non-entity-specific
training requirements laid out in the final rule. TSA will make these
training videos available to all owner/operators, including small
entities not
[[Page 16496]]
covered by the high-risk criteria, which could be used on a voluntary
basis by entities seeking to improve their security posture.
TSA considered two other feasible alternatives, detailed in chapter
5 of the Final RIA, in addition to the final rule.
Alternative 1: Requirements Limited to Those Expressly Authorized
by Statute. In comparison to the final rule, the first regulatory
alternative TSA considered would limit the requirements to those
expressly authorized by the 9/11 Act or other relevant statutory
provisions, such as 49 U.S.C. 114. Under this alternative, the
applicability of owner/operators required to comply and employees to be
trained would remain the same and the recurrence of training would be
the same as the final rule (once every three years), but TSA would
remove the following requirements:
Recordkeeping (final rule requires retention of records
necessary to validate compliance);
Training freight rail employees on the chain of custody
procedures required by TSA's regulations (see Sec. 1580.205 for chain
of custody and control requirements relocated from Sec. 1580.107);
Security coordinators and reporting security incidents by
bus-only PTPR owner/operators; and
Reporting security incidents by OTRB owner/operators.
The alternative would still include requirements to provide
security training to security-sensitive employees (with the exception
of chain of custody and control) once every three years, designating
security coordinators for OTRB owner/operators, and providing access to
TSA to inspect for compliance. The narrower scope from this alternative
means the costs to small businesses would be less than the final rule.
TSA rejected this alternative based on the determination that
recordkeeping is implicitly required as it is a necessary component of
enforcing a regulation, and the other measures are necessary for
consistent application of the TSA's requirements imposed to enhance
surface transportation security.
Alternative 2: Increased Population Alternative with Program
Creation Assumptions. TSA considered a second regulatory alternative
that would require annual training and increase the population of
owner/operators required to comply with the final rule. For Alternative
2, TSA considered expanding the scope of applicability to any freight
railroad, PTPR system, or OTRB operator operating fixed-route service
to, through, or from a UASI. Under this alternative, TSA would impose
additional burdens to a significant number of small owner/operators,
including those that TSA has not determined to be higher-risk. This
alternative could have a disproportionate impact upon small entities.
Alternative 2 would increase total costs upon the regulated community
as a whole. Additionally, TSA received comments to the NPRM (section
VI.C.4 of this preamble) that suggested longer time periods between
training, such as two or three years. In response to these comments,
TSA modified the recurrent training requirement to at least once every
three years in the final rule, and rejected the annual recurrent
training requirement in Alternative 2. TSA rejected this alternative as
it is inconsistent with the agency's risk-based security policy
determination to focus on higher-risk owner/operators and commitment to
outcomes-based regulations. TSA also rejected this alternative because
of its annual recurrent training requirement.
6. International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from
establishing any standards or engaging in 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. TSA has assessed the potential
effect of this final rule and has determined that it would have only a
domestic impact and therefore no effect on any trade-sensitive
activity.
7. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 is intended, among other
things, to curb the practice of imposing unfunded Federal mandates on
State, local, and tribal governments. Title II of UMRA requires each
Federal agency to prepare a written statement assessing the effects of
any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule that may result
in a $100 million or more expenditure (adjusted annually for inflation)
in any one year by State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate is deemed to be a
``significant regulatory action.'' \143\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\143\ Supra n. 63 as codified at 2 U.S.C. 1532.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule does not contain such a mandate. Therefore, the
requirements in Title II of UMRA do not apply and TSA has not prepared
a statement.
C. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
TSA has analyzed this rulemaking under the principles and criteria
of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this action
would not have a substantial direct 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, and therefore would not have federalism implications.
D. Environmental Analysis
TSA has reviewed this rulemaking for purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and has
determined that this action will not have a significant effect on the
human environment. This action is covered by categorical exclusion
(CATEX) number A3(b) in DHS Management Directive 023-01 (formerly
Management Directive 5100.1), Environmental Planning Program, which
guides TSA compliance with NEPA.
E. Energy Impact Analysis
The energy impact of this rulemaking has been assessed in
accordance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), Public
Law 94-163, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6362). TSA has determined that this
rulemaking is not a major regulatory action under the provisions of the
EPCA.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 1500
Air carriers, Air transportation, Aircraft, Airports, Bus transit
systems, Commuter bus systems, Law enforcement officer, Maritime
carriers, Over-the-Road buses, Public transportation, Rail hazardous
materials receivers, Rail hazardous materials shippers, Rail transit
systems, Railroad carriers, Railroad safety, Railroads, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Transportation facility,
Vessels.
49 CFR Part 1520
Air carriers, Air transportation, Aircraft, Airports, Bus transit
systems, Commuter bus systems, Law enforcement officer, Maritime
carriers, Over-the-Road buses, Public transportation, Rail hazardous
materials receivers, Rail hazardous materials shippers, Rail transit
systems, Railroad carriers, Railroad safety, Railroads, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Transportation facility,
Vessels.
[[Page 16497]]
49 CFR Part 1570
Commuter bus systems, Crime, Fraud, Hazardous materials
transportation, Motor carriers, Over-the-Road bus safety, Over-the-Road
buses, Public transportation, Public transportation safety, Rail
hazardous materials receivers, Rail hazardous materials shippers, Rail
transit systems, Railroad carriers, Railroad safety, Railroads,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures,
Transportation facility, Transportation Security-Sensitive Materials.
49 CFR Part 1580
Hazardous materials transportation, Rail hazardous materials
receivers, Rail hazardous materials shippers, Railroad carriers,
Railroad safety, Railroads, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Security measures.
49 CFR Part 1582
Public transportation, Public transportation safety, Railroad
carriers, Railroad safety, Railroads, Rail transit systems, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.
49 CFR Part 1584
Over-the-Road bus safety, Over-the-Road buses, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.
The Amendments
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Transportation
Security Administration amends chapter XII, of title 49, Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
Subchapter A--Administrative and Procedural Rules
PART 1500--APPLICABILITY, TERMS, AND ABBREVIATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 1500 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114, 5103, 40113, 44901-44907, 44913-44914,
44916-44918, 44935-44936, 44942, 46105; Pub. L. 110-53 (121 Stat.
266, Aug. 3, 2007) secs. 1408 (6 U.S.C. 1137), 1501 (6 U.S.C. 1151),
1517 (6 U.S.C. 1167), and 1534 (6 U.S.C. 1184).
0
2. Revise Sec. 1500.3 to read as follows:
Sec. 1500.3 Terms and abbreviations used in this chapter.
As used in this chapter:
Administrator means the Assistant Secretary for Homeland Security,
Transportation Security Administration (Assistant Secretary), who is
the highest-ranking TSA official, or his or her designee. Administrator
also means the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security
identified in 49 U.S.C. 114(b).
Authorized representative means any individual who is not a direct
employee of a person regulated under this title, but is authorized to
act on that person's behalf to perform measures required under the
Transportation Security Regulations, or a TSA security program. For
purposes of this subchapter, the term ``authorized representative''
includes agents, contractors, and subcontractors, and employees of the
same.
Bus means any of several types of motor vehicles used by public or
private entities to provide transportation service for passengers.
Bus transit system means a public transportation system providing
frequent transportation service (not limited to morning and evening
peak travel times) for the primary purpose of moving passengers between
bus stops, often through multiple connections (a bus transit system
does not become a commuter bus system even if its primary purpose is
the transportation of commuters). This term does not include tourist,
scenic, historic, or excursion operations.
Commuter bus system means a system providing passenger service
primarily during morning and evening peak periods, between an urban
area and more distant outlying communities in a greater metropolitan
area. This term does not include tourist, scenic, historic, or
excursion operations.
Commuter passenger train service means ``train, commuter'' as
defined in 49 CFR 238.5, and includes service provided by diesel or
electric powered locomotives and railroad passenger cars to serve an
urban area, its suburbs, and more distant outlying communities in the
greater metropolitan area. A commuter passenger train service is part
of the general railroad system of transportation regardless of whether
it is physically connected to other railroads.
DHS means the Department of Homeland Security and any directorate,
bureau, or other component within the Department of Homeland Security,
including the United States Coast Guard.
DOT means the Department of Transportation and any operating
administration, entity, or office within the Department of
Transportation.
Fixed-route service means the provision of transportation service
by private entities operated along a prescribed route according to a
fixed schedule.
General railroad system of transportation means ``the network of
standard gauge track over which goods may be transported throughout the
nation and passengers may travel between cities and within metropolitan
and suburban areas'' as defined in appendix A to 49 CFR part 209.
Hazardous material means ``hazardous material'' as defined in 49
CFR 171.8.
Heavy rail transit means service provided by self-propelled
electric railcars, typically drawing power from a third rail, operating
in separate rights-of-way in multiple cars; also referred to as
subways, metros or regional rail.
Host railroad means a railroad that has effective control over a
segment of track.
Improvised explosive device (IED) means a device fabricated in an
improvised manner that incorporates explosives or destructive, lethal,
noxious, pyrotechnic, or incendiary chemicals in its design, and
generally includes a power supply, a switch or timer, and a detonator
or initiator.
Intercity passenger train service means both ``train, long-distance
intercity passenger'' and ``train, short-distance intercity passenger''
as defined in 49 CFR 238.5.
Light rail transit means service provided by self-propelled
electric railcars, typically drawing power from an overhead wire,
operating in either exclusive or non-exclusive rights-of-way in single
or multiple cars, with shorter distance trips, and frequent stops; also
referred to as streetcars, trolleys, and trams.
Motor vehicle means a vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or
semitrailer propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used upon the
highways in the transportation of passengers or property, or any
combination thereof, but does not include any vehicle, locomotive, or
car operated exclusively on a rail or rails, or a trolley bus operated
by electric power derived from a fixed overhead wire, furnishing local
passenger transportation similar to street-railway service.
Over-the-Road Bus (OTRB) means a bus characterized by an elevated
passenger deck located over a baggage compartment.
Owner/operator means any person that owns, or maintains operational
control over, any transportation infrastructure asset, facility, or
system regulated under this title, including airport operator, aircraft
operator, foreign air carrier, indirect air carrier, certified cargo
screening facility, flight school within the meaning of 49 CFR
1552.1(b), motor vehicle, public transportation agency, or railroad
carrier. For purposes of a maritime facility or a vessel, owner/
operator has
[[Page 16498]]
the same meaning as defined in 33 CFR 101.105.
Passenger rail car means rail rolling equipment intended to provide
transportation for members of the general public and includes a self-
propelled rail car designed to carry passengers, baggage, mail, or
express. This term includes a rail passenger coach, cab car, and a
Multiple Unit (MU) locomotive. In the context of articulated equipment,
``passenger rail car'' means that segment of the rail rolling equipment
located between two trucks. This term does not include a private rail
car.
Passenger railroad carrier means a railroad carrier that provides
transportation to persons (other than employees, contractors, or
persons riding equipment to observe or monitor railroad operations) by
railroad in intercity passenger service or commuter or other short-haul
passenger service in a metropolitan or suburban area.
Passenger train means a train that transports or is available to
transport members of the general public.
Person means an individual, corporation, company, association,
firm, partnership, society, joint-stock company, or governmental
authority. It includes a trustee, receiver, assignee, successor, or
similar representative of any of them.
Private rail car means rail rolling equipment that is used only for
excursion, recreational, or private transportation purposes. A private
rail car is not a passenger rail car.
Public transportation means transportation provided to the general
public by a regular and continuing general or specific transportation
vehicle that is owned or operated by a public transportation agency,
including providing one or more of the following types of passenger
transportation:
(1) Intercity or commuter passenger train service or other short-
haul railroad passenger service in a metropolitan or suburban area (as
described by 49 U.S.C. 20102(1)).
(2) Heavy or light rail transit service, whether on or off the
general railroad system of transportation.
(3) An automated guideway, cable car, inclined plane, funicular, or
monorail system.
(4) Bus transit or commuter bus service.
Public transportation agency means any publicly-owned or operated
provider of regular and continuing public transportation.
Rail hazardous materials receiver means any owner/operator of a
fixed-site facility that has a physical connection to the general
railroad system of transportation and receives or unloads from
transportation in commerce by rail one or more of the categories and
quantities of rail security-sensitive materials identified in 49 CFR
1580.3, but does not include the owner/operator of a facility owned or
operated by a department, agency or instrumentality of the Federal
Government.
Rail hazardous materials shipper means the owner/operator of any
fixed-site facility that has a physical connection to the general
railroad system of transportation and offers (as defined in the
definition of ``person who offers or offeror'' in 49 CFR 171.8),
prepares or loads for transportation by rail one or more of the
categories and quantities of rail security-sensitive materials as
identified in 49 CFR 1580.3, but does not include the owner/operator of
a facility owned or operated by a department, agency or instrumentality
of the Federal Government.
Rail secure area means a secure location(s) identified by a rail
hazardous materials shipper or rail hazardous materials receiver where
security-related pre-transportation or transportation functions are
performed or rail cars containing the categories and quantities of rail
security-sensitive materials are prepared, loaded, stored, and/or
unloaded.
Rail transit facility means rail transit stations, terminals, and
locations at which rail transit infrastructure assets are stored,
command and control operations are performed, or maintenance is
performed. The term also includes rail yards, crew management centers,
dispatching centers, transportation terminals and stations, fueling
centers, and telecommunication centers.
Rail transit system or ``Rail Fixed Guideway System'' means any
light, heavy, or rapid rail system, monorail, inclined plane,
funicular, cable car, trolley, or automated guideway that traditionally
does not operate on track that is part of the general railroad system
of transportation.
Railroad carrier means an owner/operator providing railroad
transportation.
Railroad transportation means:
(1) Any form of non-highway ground transportation that runs on
rails or electromagnetic guideways, including:
(i) Commuter or other short-haul rail passenger service in a
metropolitan or suburban area; and
(ii) High speed ground transportation systems that connect
metropolitan areas, without regard to whether these systems use new
technologies not associated with traditional railroads.
(2) Such term includes rail transit service operating on track that
is part of the general railroad system of transportation but does not
include rapid transit operations in an urban area that are not
connected to the general railroad system of transportation.
Record includes any means by which information is preserved,
irrespective of format, including a book, paper, drawing, map,
recording, tape, film, photograph, machine-readable material, and any
information stored in an electronic format. The term record also
includes any draft, proposed, or recommended change to any record.
Sensitive security information (SSI) means information that is
described in and must be managed in accordance with 49 CFR part 1520.
State means a State of the United States and the District of
Columbia.
Tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion operation means a railroad
or bus operation that carries passengers, often using antiquated
equipment, with the conveyance of the passengers to a particular
destination not being the principal purpose. Train or bus movements of
new passenger equipment for demonstration purposes are not tourist,
scenic, historic, or excursion operations.
Transit means mass transportation by a conveyance that provides
regular and continuing general or special transportation to the public,
but does not include school bus, charter, or sightseeing
transportation. Rail transit may occur on or off the general railroad
system of transportation.
Transportation or transport means the movement of property
including loading, unloading, and storage. Transportation or transport
also includes the movement of people, boarding, and disembarking
incident to that movement.
Transportation facility means a location at which transportation
cargo, equipment or infrastructure assets are stored, equipment is
transferred between conveyances and/or modes of transportation,
transportation command and control operations are performed, or
maintenance operations are performed. The term also includes, but is
not limited to, passenger stations and terminals (including any fixed
facility at which passengers are picked-up or discharged), vehicle
storage buildings or yards, crew management centers, dispatching
centers, fueling centers, and telecommunication centers.
Transportation security equipment and systems means items, both
integrated into a system and stand-alone, used by owner/operators to
enhance capabilities to detect, deter,
[[Page 16499]]
prevent, or respond to a threat or incident, including, but not limited
to, video surveillance, explosives detection, radiological detection,
intrusion detection, motion detection, and security screening.
Transportation Security Regulations (TSR) means the regulations
issued by the Transportation Security Administration, in title 49 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, chapter XII, which includes parts 1500
through 1699.
Transportation Security-Sensitive Material (TSSM) means hazardous
materials identified in 49 CFR 172.800(b).
TSA means the Transportation Security Administration.
United States, in a geographical sense, means the States of the
United States, the District of Columbia, and territories and
possessions of the United States, including the territorial sea and the
overlying airspace.
Vulnerability assessment includes any review, audit, or other
examination of the security of a transportation system, infrastructure
asset, or a transportation-related automated system or network to
determine its vulnerability to unlawful interference, whether during
the conception, planning, design, construction, operation, or
decommissioning phase. A vulnerability assessment includes the
methodology for the assessment, the results of the assessment, and any
proposed, recommended, or directed actions or countermeasures to
address security concerns.
PART 1503--INVESTIGATIVE AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
0
3. The authority citation for part 1503 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 18 U.S.C. 6002; 28 U.S.C. 2461 (note); 49 U.S.C. 114,
20109, 31105, 40113-40114, 40119, 44901-44907, 46101-46107, 46109-
46110, 46301, 46305, 46311, 46313-46314; Public Law 104-134 (110
Stat. 1321; April 26, 1996), as amended by Pub. L. 114-74 (129 Stat.
584; Nov. 2, 2015); and Pub. L. 110-53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007)
secs. 1408 (6 U.S.C. 1137), 1413 (6 U.S.C. 1142), 1501 (6 U.S.C.
1151), 1512 (6 U.S.C. 1162), 1517 (6 U.S.C. 1167), 1531 (6 U.S.C.
1181), and 1534 (6 U.S.C. 1184).
Subpart B--Scope of Investigative and Enforcement Procedures
0
4. In Sec. 1503.101 revise paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) and add paragraph
(b)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 1503.101 TSA requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Those provisions of title 49 U.S.C. administered by the
Administrator;
(2) 46 U.S.C. chapter 701; and
(3) Provisions of Public Law 110-53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007)
not codified in title 49 U.S.C. that are administered by the
Administrator.
Subchapter B--Security Rules for all Modes of Transportation
PART 1520--PROTECTION OF SENSITIVE SECURITY INFORMATION
0
5. The authority citation for part 1520 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 114, 40113, 44901-44907, 44913-44914,
44916-44918, 44935-44936, 44942, 46105, 70102-70106, 70117; Pub. L.
110-53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) secs. 1408 (6 U.S.C. 1137),
1413 (6 U.S.C. 1142), 1501 (6 U.S.C. 1151), 1512 (6 U.S.C. 1162),
1517 (6 U.S.C. 1167), 1531 (6 U.S.C. 1181), and 1534 (6 U.S.C.
1184).
Sec. 1520.3 [Amended]
0
6. In Sec. 1520.3, remove the definitions of ``DHS, ``DOT'', ``Rail
facility'', ``Rail hazardous materials receiver'', ``Rail hazardous
materials shipper, ``Rail transit facility'', ``Rail transit system or
Rail Fixed Guideway System'', ``Railroad'', ``Record'', and
``Vulnerability assessment''.
0
7. In Sec. 1520.5, revise paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(6)(i), (b)(8)
introductory text, (b)(10), (b)(12) introductory text, and (b)(15) to
read as follows:
Sec. 1520.5 Sensitive security information.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Security programs, security plans, and contingency plans. Any
security program, security plan, or security contingency plan issued,
established, required, received, or approved by DHS or DOT, including
any comments, instructions, or implementing guidance, including--
(i) Any aircraft operator, airport operator, fixed base operator,
or air cargo security program, or security contingency plan under this
chapter;
(ii) Any vessel, maritime facility, or port area security plan
required or directed under Federal law;
(iii) Any national or area security plan prepared under 46 U.S.C.
70103;
(iv) Any security incident response plan established under 46
U.S.C. 70104, and
(v) Any security program or plan required under subchapter D of
this title.
* * * * *
(6) * * *
(i) Details of any aviation, maritime, or surface transportation
inspection, or any investigation or an alleged violation of aviation,
maritime, or surface transportation security requirements of Federal
law, that could reveal a security vulnerability, including the identity
of the Federal special agent or other Federal employee who conducted
the inspection or investigation, and including any recommendations
concerning the inspection or investigation.
* * * * *
(8) Security measures. Specific details of aviation, maritime, or
surface transportation security measures, both operational and
technical, whether applied directly by the Federal government or
another person, including the following:
* * * * *
(10) Security training materials. Records created or obtained for
the purpose of training persons employed by, contracted with, or acting
for the Federal government or another person to carry out aviation,
maritime, or surface transportation security measures required or
recommended by DHS or DOT.
* * * * *
(12) Critical transportation infrastructure asset information. Any
list identifying systems or assets, whether physical or virtual, so
vital to the aviation, maritime, or surface transportation that the
incapacity or destruction of such assets would have a debilitating
impact on transportation security, if the list is--
* * * * *
(15) Research and development. Information obtained or developed in
the conduct of research related to aviation, maritime, or surface
transportation, where such research is approved, accepted, funded,
recommended, or directed by DHS or DOT, including research results.
* * * * *
0
8. In Sec. 1520.7, revise paragraph (n) to read as follows:
Sec. 1520.7 Covered persons.
* * * * *
(n) Each owner/operator of maritime or surface transportation
subject to the requirements of subchapter D of this chapter.
0
9. Revise the heading for subchapter D to read as follows:
Subchapter D--Maritime and Surface Transportation Security
0
10. Revise part 1570 to read as follows:
[[Page 16500]]
PART 1570--GENERAL RULES
Subpart A--General
Sec.
1570.1 Scope.
1570.3 Terms used in this subchapter.
1570.5 Fraud and intentional falsification of records.
1570.7 Security responsibilities of employees and other persons.
1570.9 Compliance, inspection, and enforcement.
Subpart B--Security Programs
1570.101 Scope.
1570.103 Content.
1570.105 Responsibility for Determinations.
1570.107 Recognition of prior or established security measures or
programs.
1570.109 Submission and approval.
1570.111 Implementation schedules.
1570.113 Amendments requested by owner/operator.
1570.115 Amendments required by TSA.
1570.117 Alternative measures.
1570.119 Petitions for reconsideration.
1570.121 Recordkeeping and availability.
Subpart C--Operations
1570.201 Security Coordinator.
1570.203 Reporting significant security concerns.
Subpart D--Security Threat Assessments
1570.301 Fraudulent use or manufacture; responsibilities of persons.
1570.303 Inspection of credential.
1570.305 False statements regarding security background checks by
public transportation agency or railroad carrier.
Appendix A to Part 1570--Reporting of Significant Security Concerns
Authority: 18 U.S.C. 842, 845; 46 U.S.C. 70105; 49 U.S.C. 114,
5103a, 40113, and 46105; Pub. L. 108-90 (117 Stat. 1156, Oct. 1,
2003), sec. 520 (6 U.S.C. 469), as amended by Pub. L. 110-329 (122
Stat. 3689, Sept. 30, 2008) sec. 543 (6 U.S.C. 469); Pub. L. 110-53
(121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) secs. 1402 (6 U.S.C. 1131), 1405 (6
U.S.C. 1134), 1408 (6 U.S.C. 1137), 1413 (6 U.S.C. 1142), 1414 (6
U.S.C. 1143), 1501 (6 U.S.C. 1151), 1512 (6 U.S.C. 1162), 1517 (6
U.S.C. 1167), 1522 (6 U.S.C. 1170), 1531 (6 U.S.C. 1181), and 1534
(6 U.S.C. 1184).
Subpart A--General
Sec. 1570.1 Scope.
This part applies to any person involved in maritime or surface
transportation as specified in this subchapter.
Sec. 1570.3 Terms used in this subchapter.
In addition to the definitions in Sec. Sec. 1500.3, 1500.5, and
1503.202 of subchapter A, the following terms are used in this
subchapter:
Adjudicate means to make an administrative determination of whether
an applicant meets the standards in this subchapter, based on the
merits of the issues raised.
Alien means any person not a citizen or national of the United
States.
Alien registration number means the number issued by the DHS to an
individual when he or she becomes a lawful permanent resident of the
United States or attains other lawful, non-citizen status.
Applicant means a person who has applied for one of the security
threat assessments identified in this subchapter.
Commercial driver's license (CDL) is used as defined in 49 CFR
383.5.
Contractor means a person or organization that provides a service
for an owner/operator regulated under this subchapter consistent with a
specific understanding or arrangement. The understanding can be a
written contract or an informal arrangement that reflects an ongoing
relationship between the parties.
Convicted means any plea of guilty or nolo contendere, or any
finding of guilt, except when the finding of guilt is subsequently
overturned on appeal, pardoned, or expunged. For purposes of this
subchapter, a conviction is expunged when the conviction is removed
from the individual's criminal history record and there are no legal
disabilities or restrictions associated with the expunged conviction,
other than the fact that the conviction may be used for sentencing
purposes for subsequent convictions. In addition, where an individual
is allowed to withdraw an original plea of guilty or nolo contendere
and enter a plea of not guilty and the case is subsequently dismissed,
the individual is no longer considered to have a conviction for
purposes of this subchapter.
Determination of No Security Threat means an administrative
determination by TSA that an individual does not pose a security threat
warranting denial of an HME or a TWIC.
Employee means an individual who is engaged or compensated by an
owner/operator regulated under this subchapter, or by a contractor to
an owner/operator regulated under this subchapter. The term includes
direct employees, contractor employees, authorized representatives,
immediate supervisors, and individuals who are self-employed.
Federal Maritime Security Coordinator (FMSC) has the same meaning
as defined in 46 U.S.C. 70103(a)(2)(G); is the Captain of the Port
(COTP) exercising authority for the COTP zones described in 33 CFR part
3, and is the Port Facility Security Officer as described in the
International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code, part A.
Final Determination of Threat Assessment means a final
administrative determination by TSA, including the resolution of
related appeals, that an individual poses a security threat warranting
denial of an HME or a TWIC.
Hazardous materials endorsement (HME) means the authorization for
an individual to transport hazardous materials in commerce, an
indication of which must be on the individual's commercial driver's
license, as provided in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
regulations in 49 CFR part 383.
Immediate supervisor means a manager, supervisor, or agent of the
owner/operator to the extent the individual:
(1) Performs the work of a security-sensitive employee; or
(2) Supervises and otherwise directs the performance of a security-
sensitive employee.
Imprisoned or imprisonment means confined to a prison, jail, or
institution for the criminally insane, on a full-time basis, pursuant
to a sentence imposed as the result of a criminal conviction or finding
of not guilty by reason of insanity. Time spent confined or restricted
to a half-way house, treatment facility, or similar institution,
pursuant to a sentence imposed as the result of a criminal conviction
or finding of not guilty by reason of insanity, does not constitute
imprisonment for purposes of this rule.
Incarceration means confined or otherwise restricted to a jail-type
institution, half-way house, treatment facility, or another institution
on a full or part-time basis, pursuant to a sentence imposed as the
result of a criminal conviction or finding of not guilty by reason of
insanity.
Initial Determination of Threat Assessment means an initial
administrative determination by TSA that an applicant poses a security
threat warranting denial of an HME or a TWIC.
Initial Determination of Threat Assessment and Immediate Revocation
means an initial administrative determination that an individual poses
a security threat that warrants immediate revocation of an HME or
invalidation of a TWIC. In the case of an HME, the State must
immediately revoke the HME if TSA issues an Initial Determination of
Threat Assessment and Immediate Revocation. In the case of a TWIC, TSA
invalidates the TWIC when TSA issues an Initial Determination of Threat
Assessment and Immediate Revocation.
Invalidate means the action TSA takes to make a credential
inoperative when
[[Page 16501]]
it is reported as lost, stolen, damaged, no longer needed, or when TSA
determines an applicant does not meet the security threat assessment
standards of 49 CFR part 1572.
Lawful permanent resident means an alien lawfully admitted for
permanent residence, as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20).
Maritime facility has the same meaning as ``facility'' together
with ``OCS facility'' (Outer Continental Shelf facility), as defined in
33 CFR 101.105.
Mental health facility means a mental institution, mental hospital,
sanitarium, psychiatric facility, and any other facility that provides
diagnoses by licensed professionals of mental retardation or mental
illness, including a psychiatric ward in a general hospital.
National of the United States means a citizen of the United States,
or a person who, though not a citizen, owes permanent allegiance to the
United States, as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22), and includes
American Samoa and Swains Island.
Revocation means the termination, deactivation, rescission,
invalidation, cancellation, or withdrawal of the privileges and duties
conferred by an HME or TWIC, when TSA determines an applicant does not
meet the security threat assessment standards of 49 CFR part 1572.
Secure area means the area on board a vessel or at a facility or
outer continental shelf facility, over which the owner/operator has
implemented security measures for access control, as defined by a Coast
Guard approved security plan. It does not include passenger access
areas or public access areas, as these terms are defined in 33 CFR
104.106 and 105.106 respectively. Vessels operating under the waivers
provided for at 46 U.S.C. 8103(b)(3)(A) or (B) have no secure areas.
Facilities subject to 33 CFR chapter I, subchapter H, part 105 may,
with approval of the Coast Guard, designate only those portions of
their facility that are directly connected to maritime transportation
or are at risk of being involved in a transportation security incident
as their secure areas.
Security-sensitive employee, for purposes of this part, means
``security sensitive employee'' as defined in Sec. 1580.3, Sec.
1582.3, or Sec. 1584.3 of this title.
Security-sensitive job function, for purposes of this part, means a
job function identified in appendix B to part 1580, appendix B to part
1582, and appendix B to part 1584 of this title.
Security threat means an individual whom TSA determines or suspects
of posing a threat to national security; to transportation security; or
of terrorism.
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) means a
Federal biometric credential, issued to an individual, when TSA
determines that the individual does not pose a security threat.
Withdrawal of Initial Determination of Threat Assessment is the
document that TSA issues after issuing an Initial Determination of
Security Threat, when TSA determines that an individual does not pose a
security threat that warrants denial of an HME or TWIC.
Sec. 1570.5 Fraud and intentional falsification of records.
No person may make, cause to be made, attempt, or cause to attempt
any of the following:
(a) Any fraudulent or intentionally false statement in any record
or report that is kept, made, or used to show compliance with the
subchapter, or exercise any privileges under this subchapter.
(b) Any reproduction or alteration, for fraudulent purpose, of any
record, report, security program, access medium, or identification
medium issued under this subchapter or pursuant to standards in this
subchapter.
Sec. 1570.7 Security responsibilities of employees and other
persons.
(a) No person may--
(1) Tamper or interfere with, compromise, modify, attempt to
circumvent, or cause another person to tamper or interfere with,
compromise, modify, or attempt to circumvent any security measure
implemented under this subchapter.
(2) Enter, or be present within, a secured or restricted area
without complying with the security measures applied as required under
this subchapter to control access to, or presence or movement in, such
areas.
(3) Use, allow to be used, or cause to be used, any approved access
medium or identification medium that authorizes the access, presence,
or movement of persons or vehicles in secured or restricted areas in
any other manner than that for which it was issued by the appropriate
authority to meet the requirements of this subchapter.
(b) The provisions of paragraph (a) of this section do not apply to
conducting inspections or tests to determine compliance with this
subchapter authorized by--
(1) TSA and DHS officials working with TSA; or
(2) The owner/operator when acting in accordance with the
procedures described in a security plan and/or program approved by TSA.
Sec. 1570.9 Compliance, inspection, and enforcement.
(a) Each person subject to any of the requirements of this
subchapter, must allow TSA and other authorized DHS officials, at any
time and in a reasonable manner, without advance notice, to enter,
assess, inspect, and test property, facilities, equipment, and
operations; and to view, inspect, and copy records, as necessary to
carry out TSA's security-related statutory or regulatory authorities,
including its authority to--
(1) Assess threats to transportation.
(2) Enforce security-related laws, regulations, directives, and
requirements.
(3) Inspect, maintain, and test the security of facilities,
equipment, and systems.
(4) Ensure the adequacy of security measures for the transportation
of passengers and cargo.
(5) Oversee the implementation, and ensure the adequacy, of
security measures for the owner/operator's conveyances and vehicles, at
transportation facilities and infrastructure and other assets related
to transportation.
(6) Review security plans and/or programs.
(7) Determine compliance with any requirements in this chapter.
(8) Carry out such other duties, and exercise such other powers,
relating to transportation security, as the Administrator for TSA
considers appropriate, to the extent authorized by law.
(b) At the request of TSA, each owner/operator subject to the
requirements of this subchapter must provide evidence of compliance
with this chapter, including copies of records.
(c) TSA and other authorized DHS officials, may enter, without
advance notice, and be present within any area or within any vehicle or
conveyance, terminal, or other facility covered by this chapter without
access media or identification media issued or approved by an owner/
operator covered by this chapter in order to inspect or test
compliance, or perform other such duties as TSA may direct.
(d) TSA inspectors and other authorized DHS officials working with
TSA will, on request, present their credentials for examination, but
the credentials may not be photocopied or otherwise reproduced.
[[Page 16502]]
Subpart B--Security Programs
Sec. 1570.101 Scope.
The requirements of this subpart address general security program
requirements applicable to each owner/operator required to have a
security program under subpart B to 49 CFR parts 1580, 1582, and 1584.
Sec. 1570.103 Content.
(a) Security program. Except as otherwise approved by TSA, each
owner/operator required to have a security program must address each of
the security program requirements identified in subpart B to 49 CFR
parts 1580, 1582, and 1584.
(b) Use of appendices. The owner/operator may comply with the
requirements referenced in paragraph (a) of this section by including
in its security program, as an appendix, any document that contains the
information required by the applicable subpart B, including procedures,
protocols or memorandums of understanding related to external agency
response to security incidents or events. The appendix must be
referenced in the corresponding section(s) of the security program.
Sec. 1570.105 Responsibility for Determinations.
(a) Higher-risk operations. While TSA has determined the criteria
for applicability of the requirements in subpart B to 49 CFR parts
1580, 1582, and 1584 based on risk-assessments for freight railroad,
public transportation system, passenger railroad, or over-the-road
(OTRB) owner/operators are required to determine if the applicability
criteria identified in subpart B to parts 1580, 1582, and 1584 apply to
their operations. Owner/operators are required to notify TSA of
applicability within 30 days of June 22, 2020.
(b) New or modified operations. If an owner/operator commences new
operations or modifies existing operations after June 22, 2020, that
person is responsible for determining whether the new or modified
operations would meet the applicability criteria in subpart B to 49 CFR
part 1580, 1582, or 1584 and must notify TSA no later than 90 calendar
days before commencing operations or implementing modifications.
Sec. 1570.107 Recognition of prior or established security measures
or programs.
Previously provided security training may be credited towards
satisfying the requirements of this subchapter provided the owner/
operator--
(a) Obtains a complete record of such training and validates the
training meets requirements of Sec. 1580.115, Sec. 1582.115, or Sec.
1584.115 of this subchapter as it relates to the function of the
individual security-sensitive employee and the training was provided
within the schedule required for recurrent training.
(b) Retains a record of such training in compliance with the
requirements of Sec. 1570.121 of this part.
Sec. 1570.109 Submission and approval.
(a) Submission of security program. Each owner/operator required
under parts 1580, 1582, or 1584 of this subchapter to adopt and carry
out a security program must submit it to TSA for approval in a form and
manner prescribed by TSA.
(b) Security training deadlines. Except as otherwise directed by
TSA, each owner/operator required under subpart B to part 1580, 1582,
or 1584 of this subchapter to develop a security training program
must--
(1) Submit its program to TSA for approval no later than 90
calendar days after June 22, 2020.
(2) If commencing or modifying operations so as to be subject to
the requirements of subpart B to 49 CFR part 1580, 1582, or 1584 after
June 22, 2020, submit a training program to TSA no later than 90
calendar days before commencing new or modified operations.
(c) TSA approval. (1) No later than 60 calendar days after
receiving the proposed security program required by subpart B to 49 CFR
parts 1580, 1582, and 1584, TSA will either approve the program or
provide the owner/operator with written notice to modify the program to
comply with the applicable requirements of this subchapter. TSA will
notify the owner/operator if it needs an extension of time to approve
the program or provide the owner/operator with written notice to modify
the program to comply with the applicable requirements of this
subchapter.
(2) Notice to modify. If TSA provides the owner/operator with
written notice to modify the security program to comply with the
applicable requirements of this subchapter, the owner/operator must
provide a modified security program to TSA for approval within the
timeframe specified by TSA.
(3) TSA may request additional information, and the owner/operator
must provide the information within the time period TSA prescribes. The
60-day period for TSA approval or modification will begin when the
owner/operator provides the additional information.
(g) Petition for reconsideration. Within 30 days of receiving the
notice to modify, the owner/operator may file a petition for
reconsideration under Sec. 1570.119 of this part.
Sec. 1570.111 Implementation schedules.
(a) Initial security training. Each owner/operator required under
parts 1580, 1582, or 1584 of this subchapter to adopt and carry out a
security program must provide initial security training to security-
sensitive employees, using the curriculum approved by TSA--
(1) No later than one year after the date of TSA-approval of the
owner/operator's security training program if the employee is employed
to perform a security-sensitive function on the date TSA approves the
program.
(2) No later than 60 calendar days after the employee first
performs a security-sensitive job function if performance of a
security-sensitive job function is initiated after TSA approves the
security training program.
(3) No later than the 60th calendar day of employment performing a
security-sensitive function, aggregated over a consecutive 12-month
period, if the security-sensitive job function is performed
intermittently.
(b) Recurrent security training. (1) Except as provided in
paragraph (b)(2) of this section, a security-sensitive employee
required to receive training under part 1580, 1582, or 1584 of this
subchapter must receive the required training at least once every three
years.
(2) If an owner/operator modifies a security program or security
plan for which training is required under Sec. 1580.203(b), Sec.
1582.115(b), or Sec. 1584.115(b) of this subchapter, the owner/
operator must ensure each security-sensitive employee with position- or
function-specific responsibilities related to the revised plan or
program changes receives training on the revisions within 90 days of
implementation of the revised plan or program changes. All other
employees must receive training that reflects the changes to the
operating security requirements as part of their regularly scheduled
recurrent training.
(3) The three-year recurrent training cycle is based on the
anniversary calendar month of the employee's initial security training.
If the owner/operator provides the recurrent security training in the
month of, the month before, or the month after it is due, the employee
is considered to have taken the training in the month it is due.
(c) Extensions of time. TSA may grant an extension of time for
implementing a security program identified in subpart B to parts 1580,
1582, and 1584 of this subchapter upon a showing of good
[[Page 16503]]
cause. The owner/operator must request the extension of time in writing
and TSA must receive the request within a reasonable time before the
due date to be extended; an owner/operator may request an extension
after the expiration of a due date by sending a written request
describing why the failure to meet the due date was excusable. TSA will
respond to the request in writing.
Sec. 1570.113 Amendments requested by owner/operator.
(a) Changes to ownership or control of operations. Each owner/
operator required under part 1580, 1582, or 1584 of this subchapter to
adopt and carry out a security program must submit a request to amend
its security program if, after approval, there are any changes to the
ownership or control of the operation.
(b) Changes to conditions affecting security. Each owner/operator
required under part 1580, 1582, or 1584 of this subchapter to adopt and
carry out a security program must submit a request to amend its
security program if, after approval, the owner/operator makes, or
intends to make, permanent changes to any of the following procedures,
measures, or other aspects of security or emergency response planning
implemented by the owner/operator to address:
(1) Specific procedures implemented or used to prevent and detect
unauthorized access to restricted areas designated by the owner/
operator;
(2) Measures to be implemented in response to a period of
heightened security risk, communicated through a DHS enhanced security
notification, including the process used to notify all employees of
changes in alert level status or requirements to implement specific
elements of the security plan and verify that appropriate enhanced
security measures have been implemented at all relevant locations.
(3) Emergency response plans, including:
(i) Coordinated response plans establishing procedures for
appropriate interaction with State, local, and tribal law enforcement
agencies, emergency responders, and Federal officials in order to
coordinate security measures and plans for response in the event of a
terrorist threat, attack, or other transportation security-related
incident;
(ii) Specific procedures to be implemented or used by the owner/
operator in response to a terrorist attack, including evacuation and
communication plans that include individuals with disabilities; and
(iii) Additional measures to be adopted to address weaknesses in
emergency response procedures identified during regular drills or
exercises that test corporate capabilities to direct, coordinate, and
execute prevention and response activities for terrorist attacks or
other security threats, including tunnel evacuation procedures, if
applicable.
(iv) Redundant and backup systems to ensure the continuity of
operations of critical assets and infrastructure system in the event of
a terrorist attack or other transportation security-related incident.
(c) Changes to security training curriculum. Each owner/operator
required under part 1580, 1582, or 1584 of this subchapter to adopt and
carry out a security program must submit a request to amend its
security program if, after approval, the owner/operator makes, or
intends to make, permanent changes to its security training curriculum
required under part 1580, 1582, or 1584, including changes to address:
(1) Determinations that the security training program is
ineffective based on the approved method for evaluating effectiveness
in the security training program approved by TSA under subpart B of
parts 1580, 1582, and 1584; or
(2) Development of recurrent training material for purposes of
meeting the requirements in Sec. 1570.111(b) of this part or other
alternative training materials not previously approved by TSA.
(d) Permanent change. For purposes of this section, a ``permanent
change'' is one intended to be in effect for 60 or more calendar days.
(e) Schedule for requesting amendment. The owner/operator must file
the request for an amendment with TSA no later than 65 calendar days
after the change in subsection (b) takes effect, unless TSA allows a
shorter time period.
(f) TSA approval. (1) Within 30 calendar days after receiving a
proposed amendment, TSA will, in writing, either approve or deny the
request to amend. TSA will notify the owner/operator if it needs an
extension of time to consider the proposed amendment.
(2) TSA may approve--
(i) An amendment to a security program if TSA determines that it is
in the interest of the public and transportation security and the
proposed amendment provides the level of security required under this
subchapter.
(ii) Modification to security training curriculum, including
alternative training for purposes of meeting the recurrent training
requirement, if all the required training elements are addressed and
the material is consistent with the most recent iteration of the
security program submitted to, and approved by, TSA (including
amendments made to reflect relevant changes to operations and/or
security measures and response plans).
(iii) TSA may request additional information from the owner/
operator before rendering a decision.
(g) Petition for reconsideration. No later than 30 calendar days
after receiving a denial, the owner/operator may file a petition for
reconsideration under Sec. 1570.119 of this part.
Sec. 1570.115 Amendments required by TSA.
(a) Notification of requirement to amend. TSA may require
amendments to a security program in the interest of the public and
transportation security, including any new information about emerging
threats, or methods for addressing emerging threats, as follows:
(1) TSA will notify the owner/operator of the proposed amendment,
fixing a period of not less than 30 calendar days within which the
owner/operator may submit written information, views, and arguments on
the amendment.
(2) After TSA considers all relevant material received, TSA will
notify the owner/operator of any amendment adopted or rescind the
notice.
(b) Effective date of amendment. If TSA adopts the amendment, it
becomes effective not less than 30 calendar days after the owner/
operator receives the notice of amendment, unless the owner/operator
disagrees with the proposed amendment and files a petition for
reconsideration under Sec. 1570.119 of this part no later than 15
calendar days before the effective date of the amendment. A timely
petition for reconsideration stays the effective date of the amendment.
(c) Emergency amendments. If TSA determines that there is an
emergency requiring immediate action in the interest of the public or
transportation security, TSA may issue an amendment, without the prior
notice and comment procedures in paragraph (a) of this section,
effective without stay on the date the covered owner/operator receives
notice of it. In such a case, TSA will incorporate in the notice a
brief statement of the reasons and findings for the amendment to be
adopted. The owner/operator may file a petition for reconsideration
under Sec. 1570.119 of this part; however, this does not stay the
effective date of the emergency amendment.
[[Page 16504]]
Sec. 1570.117 Alternative measures.
(a) If in TSA's judgment, the overall security of transportation
provided by an owner/operator subject to the requirements of 49 CFR
part 1580, 1582, or 1584 are not diminished, TSA may approve
alternative measures.
(b) Each owner/operator requesting alternative measures must file
the request for approval in a form and manner prescribed by TSA. The
filing of such a request does not affect the owner/operator's
responsibility for compliance while the request is being considered.
(c) TSA may request additional information, and the owner/operator
must provide the information within the time period TSA prescribes.
Within 30 calendar days after receiving a request for alternative
measures and all requested information, TSA will, in writing, either
approve or deny the request.
(d) If TSA finds that the use of the alternative measures is in the
interest of the public and transportation security, it may grant the
request subject to any conditions TSA deems necessary. In considering
the request for alternative measures, TSA will review all relevant
factors including--
(1) The risks associated with the type of operation, for example,
whether the owner/operator transports hazardous materials or passengers
within a high threat urban area, whether the owner/operator transports
passengers and the volume of passengers transported, or whether the
owner/operator hosts a passenger operation.
(2) Any relevant threat information.
(3) Other circumstances concerning potential risk to the public and
transportation security.
(e) No later than 30 calendar days after receiving a denial, the
owner/operator may petition for reconsideration under Sec. 1570.119 of
this part.
Sec. 1570.119 Petitions for reconsideration.
(a) If an owner/operator seeks to petition for reconsideration of a
determination, required modification, denial of a request for amendment
by the owner/operator, denial to rescind a TSA-required amendment, or
denial of an alternative measure, the owner/operator must submit a
written petition for reconsideration that includes a statement and any
supporting documentation explaining why the owner/operator believes
TSA's decision is incorrect.
(b) Upon review of the petition for reconsideration, the
Administrator or designee will dispose of the petition by affirming,
modifying, or rescinding its previous decision. This is considered a
final agency action.
Sec. 1570.121 Recordkeeping and availability.
(a) Retention. Each owner/operator required to have a security
program under subpart B to parts 1580, 1582, and 1584 of this
subchapter must--
(1) Retain security training records for each individual required
to receive security training under Sec. Sec. 1580.115, 1582.115, and
1584.115 that, at a minimum--
(i) Includes employee's full name, job title or function, date of
hire, and date of initial and recurrent security training; and
(ii) Identifies the date, course name, course length, and list of
topics addressed for the security training most recently provided in
each of the areas required under Sec. Sec. 1580.115, 1582.115, and
1584.115 of this subchapter.
(2) Retain records of initial and recurrent security training for
no less than five (5) years from the date of training.
(3) Provide records to current and former employees upon request
and at no charge as necessary to provide proof of training.
(b) Electronic records. Each owner/operator required to retain
records under this section may keep them in electronic form. An owner/
operator may maintain and transfer records through electronic
transmission, storage, and retrieval provided that the electronic
system provides for the maintenance of records as originally submitted
without corruption, loss of data, or tampering.
(c) Protection of SSI. Each owner/operator must restrict the
distribution, disclosure, and availability of security sensitive
information, as identified in part 1520 of this chapter, to persons
with a need to know. The owner/operator must refer requests for such
information by other persons to TSA.
(d) Availability. Each owner/operator must make the records
available to TSA upon request for inspection and copying.
Subpart C--Operations
Sec. 1570.201 Security Coordinator.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section,
each owner/operator identified in Sec. Sec. 1580.1, 1582.1, and
1584.101 of this subchapter must designate and use a primary and at
least one alternate Security Coordinator.
(b) An owner/operator identified in Sec. 1582.1(a)(2) of this
subchapter (public transportation agency) that owns or operates a bus-
only operation must designate and use a primary and at least one
alternate Security Coordinator only if the owner/operator is identified
in appendix A to part 1582 of this subchapter or is notified by TSA in
writing that a threat exists concerning that operation.
(c) An owner/operator identified in Sec. 1580.1(a)(5) or Sec.
1582.1(a)(4) of this subchapter (private rail car, tourist, scenic,
historic, or excursion rail operations) must designate and use a
primary and at least one alternate Security Coordinator, only if
notified by TSA in writing that a threat exists concerning that type of
operation.
(d) The Security Coordinator and alternate(s) must be appointed at
the corporate level.
(e) Each owner/operator required to have a Security Coordinator
must provide in writing to TSA the names, U.S. citizenship status,
titles, phone number(s), and email address(es) of the Security
Coordinator and alternate Security Coordinator(s) within 37 calendar
days of the effective date of this rule, commencement of operations, or
change in any of the information required by this section.
(f) Each owner/operator required to have a Security Coordinator
must ensure that at least one Security Coordinator--
(1) Serves as the primary contact for intelligence information and
security-related activities and communications with TSA. Any individual
designated as a Security Coordinator may perform other duties in
addition to the duties described in this section.
(2) Is accessible to TSA on a 24 hours a day, 7 days a week basis.
(3) Coordinates security practices and procedures internally and
with appropriate law enforcement and emergency response agencies.
Sec. 1570.203 Reporting significant security concerns.
(a) Each owner/operator identified in Sec. Sec. 1580.1, 1582.1,
and 1584.101 of this subchapter must report, within 24 hours of initial
discovery, any potential threats and significant security concerns
involving transportation-related operations in the United States or
transportation to, from, or within the United States as soon as
possible by the methods prescribed by TSA.
(b) Potential threats or significant security concerns encompass
incidents, suspicious activities, and threat information including, but
not limited to, the categories of reportable events listed in appendix
A to this part.
(c) Information reported must include the following, as available
and applicable:
(1) The name of the reporting individual and contact information,
[[Page 16505]]
including a telephone number or email address.
(2) The affected freight or passenger train, transit vehicle, motor
vehicle, station, terminal, rail hazardous materials facility, or other
facility or infrastructure, including identifying information and
current location.
(3) Scheduled origination and termination locations for the
affected freight or passenger train, transit vehicle, or motor vehicle-
including departure and destination city and route.
(4) Description of the threat, incident, or activity, including who
has been notified and what action has been taken.
(5) The names, other available biographical data, and/or
descriptions (including vehicle or license plate information) of
individuals or motor vehicles known or suspected to be involved in the
threat, incident, or activity.
(6) The source of any threat information.
Subpart D--Security Threat Assessments
Sec. 1570.301 Fraudulent use or manufacture; responsibilities of
persons.
(a) No person may use or attempt to use a credential, security
threat assessment, access control medium, or identification medium
issued or conducted under this subchapter that was issued or conducted
for another person.
(b) No person may make, produce, use or attempt to use a false or
fraudulently created access control medium, identification medium or
security threat assessment issued or conducted under this subchapter.
(c) No person may tamper or interfere with, compromise, modify,
attempt to circumvent, or circumvent TWIC access control procedures.
(d) No person may cause or attempt to cause another person to
violate paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section.
Sec. 1570.303 Inspection of credential.
(a) Each person who has been issued or possesses a TWIC must
present the TWIC for inspection upon a request from TSA, the Coast
Guard, or other authorized DHS representative; an authorized
representative of the National Transportation Safety Board; or a
Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer.
(b) Each person who has been issued or who possesses a TWIC must
allow his or her TWIC to be read by a reader and must submit his or her
reference biometric, such as a fingerprint, and any other required
information, such as a PIN, to the reader, upon a request from TSA, the
Coast Guard, other authorized DHS representative; or a Federal, State,
or local law enforcement officer.
Sec. 1570.305 False statements regarding security background checks
by public transportation agency or railroad carrier.
(a) Scope. This section implements sections 1414(e) (6 U.S.C. 1143)
and 1522(e) (6 U.S.C. 1170) of the ``Implementing Recommendations of
the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007,'' Public Law 110-53 (121 Stat. 266,
Aug. 3, 2007).
(b) Definitions. In addition to the terms in Sec. Sec. 1500.3,
1500.5, and 1503.202 of subchapter A and Sec. 1570.3 of subchapter D
of this chapter, the following term applies to this part:
Security background check means reviewing the following for the
purpose of identifying individuals who may pose a threat to
transportation security, national security, or of terrorism:
(i) Relevant criminal history databases.
(ii) In the case of an alien (as defined in sec. 101 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(3)), the relevant
databases to determine the status of the alien under the immigration
laws of the United States.
(iii) Other relevant information or databases, as determined by the
Secretary of Homeland Security.
(c) Prohibitions. (1) A public transportation agency or a
contractor or subcontractor of a public transportation agency may not
knowingly misrepresent to an employee or other relevant person,
including an arbiter involved in a labor arbitration, the scope,
application, or meaning of any rules, regulations, directives, or
guidance issued by the Secretary of Homeland Security related to
security background check requirements for employees when conducting a
security background check.
(2) A railroad carrier or a contractor or subcontractor of a
railroad carrier may not knowingly misrepresent to an employee or other
relevant person, including an arbiter involved in a labor arbitration,
the scope, application, or meaning of any rules, regulations,
directives, or guidance issued by the Secretary of Homeland Security
related to security background check requirements for employees when
conducting a security background check.
Appendix A to Part 1570--Reporting of Significant Security Concerns
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Breach, Attempted Intrusion, Unauthorized personnel attempting to or
and/or Interference. actually entering a restricted area or
secure site relating to a transportation
facility or conveyance owned, operated,
or used by an owner/operator subject to
this part. This includes individuals
entering or attempting to enter by
impersonation of authorized personnel
(for example, police/security, janitor,
vehicle owner/operator). Activity that
could interfere with the ability of
employees to perform duties to the
extent that security is threatened.
Misrepresentation............ Presenting false, or misusing, insignia,
documents, and/or identification, to
misrepresent one's affiliation with an
owner/operator subject to this part to
cover possible illicit activity that may
pose a risk to transportation security.
Theft, Loss, and/or Diversion Stealing or diverting identification
media or badges, uniforms, vehicles,
keys, tools capable of compromising
track integrity, portable derails,
technology, or classified or sensitive
security information documents which are
proprietary to the facility or
conveyance owned, operated, or used by
an owner/operator subject to this part.
Sabotage, Tampering, and/or Damaging, manipulating, or defeating
Vandalism. safety and security appliances in
connection with a facility,
infrastructure, conveyance, or routing
mechanism, resulting in the compromised
use or the temporary or permanent loss
of use of the facility, infrastructure,
conveyance or routing mechanism. Placing
or attaching a foreign object to a rail
car(s).
Cyber Attack................. Compromising, or attempting to compromise
or disrupt the information/technology
infrastructure of an owner/operator
subject to this part.
Expressed or Implied Threat.. Communicating a spoken or written threat
to damage or compromise a facility/
infrastructure/conveyance owned,
operated, or used by an owner/operator
subject to this part (for example, a
bomb threat or active shooter).
[[Page 16506]]
Eliciting Information........ Questioning that may pose a risk to
transportation or national security,
such as asking one or more employees of
an owner/operator subject to this part
about particular facets of a facility's
conveyance's purpose, operations, or
security procedures.
Testing or Probing of Deliberate interactions with employees of
Security. an owner/operator subject to this part
or challenges to facilities or systems
owned, operated, or used by an owner/
operator subject to this part that
reveal physical, personnel, or cyber
security capabilities.
Photography.................. Taking photographs or video of
facilities, conveyances, or
infrastructure owned, operated, or used
by an owner/operator subject to this
part in a manner that may pose a risk to
transportation or national security.
Examples include taking photographs or
video of infrequently used access
points, personnel performing security
functions (for example, patrols, badge/
vehicle checking), or security-related
equipment (for example, perimeter
fencing, security cameras).
Observation or Surveillance.. Demonstrating unusual interest in
facilities or loitering near
conveyances, railcar routing appliances
or any potentially critical
infrastructure owned or operated by an
owner/operator subject to this part in a
manner that may pose a risk to
transportation or national security.
Examples include observation through
binoculars, taking notes, or attempting
to measure distances.
Materials Acquisition and/or Acquisition and/or storage by an employee
Storage. of an owner/operator subject to this
part of materials such as cell phones,
pagers, fuel, chemicals, toxic
materials, and/or timers that may pose a
risk to transportation or national
security (for example, storage of
chemicals not needed by an employee for
the performance of his or her job
duties).
Weapons Discovery, Discharge, Weapons or explosives in or around a
or Seizure.. facility, conveyance, or infrastructure
of an owner/operator subject to this
part that may present a risk to
transportation or national security (for
example, discovery of weapons
inconsistent with the type or quantity
traditionally used by company security
personnel).
Suspicious Items or Activity. Discovery or observation of suspicious
items, activity or behavior in or around
a facility, conveyance, or
infrastructure of an owner/operator
subject to this part that results in the
disruption or termination of operations
(for example, halting the operation of a
conveyance while law enforcement
personnel investigate a suspicious bag,
briefcase, or package).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
11. Revise part 1580 to read as follows:
PART 1580--FREIGHT RAIL TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
Subpart A--General
Sec.
1580.1 Scope.
1580.3 Terms used in this part.
1580.5 Preemptive effect.
Subpart B--Security Programs
1580.101 Applicability.
1580.103 [Reserved]
1580.105 [Reserved]
1580.107 [Reserved]
1580.109 [Reserved]
1580.111 [Reserved]
1580.113 Security training program general requirements.
1580.115 Security training and knowledge for security-sensitive
employees.
Subpart C--Operations
1580.201 Applicability.
1580.203 Location and shipping information.
1580.205 Chain of custody and control requirements.
1580.207 Harmonization of Federal regulation of nuclear facilities.
Appendix A to Part 1580--High Threat Urban Areas (HTUAS)
Appendix B to Part 1580--Security-Sensitive Job Functions for
Freight Rail
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114; Pub. L. 110-53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3,
2007) secs. 1501 (6 U.S.C. 1151), 1512 (6 U.S.C. 1162) and 1517 (6
U.S.C. 1167).
Subpart A--General
Sec. 1580.1 Scope.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, this part
includes requirements for the following persons. Specific sections in
this part provide detailed requirements.
(1) Each freight railroad carrier that operates rolling equipment
on track that is part of the general railroad system of transportation.
(2) Each rail hazardous materials shipper.
(3) Each rail hazardous materials receiver located within an HTUA.
(4) Each freight railroad carrier serving as a host railroad to a
freight railroad operation described in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section or a passenger operation described in Sec. 1582.1 of this
subchapter.
(5) Each owner/operator of private rail cars, including business/
office cars and circus trains, on or connected to the general railroad
system of transportation.
(b) This part does not apply to a freight railroad carrier that
operates rolling equipment only on track inside an installation that is
not part of the general railroad system of transportation.
Sec. 1580.3 Terms used in this part.
In addition to the terms in Sec. Sec. 1500.3, 1500.5, and 1503.202
of subchapter A and Sec. 1570.3 of subchapter D of this chapter, the
following terms apply to this part:
Class I means Class I as assigned by regulations of the Surface
Transportation Board (STB) (49 CFR part 1201; General Instructions 1-
1).
Attended, in reference to a rail car, means an employee--
(1) Is physically located on-site in reasonable proximity to the
rail car;
(2) Is capable of promptly responding to unauthorized access or
activity at or near the rail car, including immediately contacting law
enforcement or other authorities; and
(3) Immediately responds to any unauthorized access or activity at
or near the rail car either personally or by contacting law enforcement
or other authorities.
Document the transfer means documentation uniquely identifying that
the rail car was attended during the transfer of custody, including:
(1) Car initial and number.
(2) Identification of individuals who attended the transfer (names
or uniquely identifying employee number).
(3) Location of transfer.
(4) Date and time the transfer was completed.
High threat urban area (HTUA) means, for purposes of this part, an
area comprising one or more cities and surrounding areas including a
10-mile buffer zone, as listed in appendix A to this part 1580.
Maintains positive control means that the rail hazardous materials
receiver
[[Page 16507]]
and the railroad carrier communicate and cooperate with each other to
provide for the security of the rail car during the physical transfer
of custody. Attending the rail car is a component of maintaining
positive control.
Rail security-sensitive materials (RSSM) means--
(1) A rail car containing more than 2,268 kg (5,000 lbs.) of a
Division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 (explosive) material, as defined in 49 CFR
173.50;
(2) A tank car containing a material poisonous by inhalation as
defined in 49 CFR 171.8, including anhydrous ammonia, Division 2.3
gases poisonous by inhalation as set forth in 49 CFR 173.115(c), and
Division 6.1 liquids meeting the defining criteria in 49 CFR
173.132(a)(1)(iii) and assigned to hazard zone A or hazard zone B in
accordance with 49 CFR 173.133(a), excluding residue quantities of
these materials; and
(3) A rail car containing a highway route-controlled quantity of a
Class 7 (radioactive) material, as defined in 49 CFR 173.403.
Residue means the hazardous material remaining in a packaging,
including a tank car, after its contents have been unloaded to the
maximum extent practicable and before the packaging is either refilled
or cleaned of hazardous material and purged to remove any hazardous
vapors.
Security-sensitive employee means an employee who performs--
(1) Service subject to the Federal hours of service laws (49 U.S.C.
chapter 211), regardless of whether the employee actually performs such
service during a particular duty tour; or
(2) One or more of the security-sensitive job functions identified
in Appendix B to this part where the security-sensitive function is
performed in the United States or in direct support of the common
carriage of persons or property between a place in the United States
and any place outside of the United States.
Sec. 1580.5 Preemptive effect.
Under 49 U.S.C. 20106, issuance of the regulations in this
subchapter preempts any State law, regulation, or order covering the
same subject matter, except an additional or more stringent law,
regulation, or order that is necessary to eliminate or reduce an
essentially local security hazard; that is not incompatible with a law,
regulation, or order of the U.S. Government; and that does not
unreasonably burden interstate commerce. For example, under 49 U.S.C.
20106, issuance of 49 CFR 1580.205 preempts any State or tribal law,
rule, regulation, order or common law requirement covering the same
subject matter.
Subpart B--Security Programs
Sec. 1580.101 Applicability.
This subpart applies to each of the following owner/operators:
(a) Described in Sec. 1580.1(a)(1) of this part that is a Class I
freight railroad.
(b) Described in Sec. 1580.1(a)(1) of this part that transports
one or more of the categories and quantities of RSSM in an HTUA.
(c) Described in Sec. 1580.1(a)(4) of this part that serves as a
host railroad to a freight railroad described in paragraph (a) of (b)
of this section or a passenger operation described in Sec. 1582.101 of
this subchapter.
Sec. 1580.103 [Reserved]
Sec. 1580.105 [Reserved]
Sec. 1580.107 [Reserved]
Sec. 1580.109 [Reserved]
Sec. 1580.111 [Reserved]
Sec. 1580.113 Security training program general requirements.
(a) Security training program required. Each owner/operator
identified in Sec. 1580.101 of this part is required to adopt and
carry out a security training program under this subpart.
(b) General requirements. The security training program must
include the following information:
(1) Name of owner/operator.
(2) Name, title, telephone number, and email address of the primary
individual to be contacted with regard to review of the security
training program.
(3) Number, by specific job function category identified in
Appendix B to this part, of security-sensitive employees trained or to
be trained.
(4) Implementation schedule that identifies a specific date by
which initial and recurrent security training required by Sec.
1570.111 of this subchapter will be completed.
(5) Location where training program records will be maintained.
(6) Curriculum or lesson plan, including learning objectives and
method of delivery (such as instructor-led or computer-based training)
for each course used to meet the requirements of Sec. 1580.115 of this
part. TSA may request additional information regarding the curriculum
during the review and approval process. If recurrent training under
Sec. 1570.111 of this subchapter is not the same as initial training,
a curriculum or lesson plan for the recurrent training will need to be
submitted and approved by TSA.
(7) Plan for ensuring supervision of untrained security-sensitive
employees performing functions identified in Appendix B to this part.
(8) Plan for notifying employees of changes to security measures
that could change information provided in previously provided training.
(9) Method(s) for evaluating the effectiveness of the security
training program in each area required by Sec. 1580.115 of this part.
(c) Relation to other training. (1) Training conducted by owner/
operators to comply other requirements or standards, such as emergency
preparedness training required by the Department of Transportation
(DOT) (49 CFR part 239) or other training for communicating with
emergency responders to arrange the evacuation of passengers, may be
combined with and used to satisfy elements of the training requirements
in this subpart.
(2) If the owner/operator submits a security training program that
relies on pre-existing or previous training materials to meet the
requirements of subpart B, the program submitted for approval must
include an index, organized in the same sequence as the requirements in
this subpart.
(d) Submission and implementation. The owner/operator must submit
and implement the security training program in accordance with the
schedules identified in Sec. Sec. 1570.109 and 1570.111 of this
subchapter.
Sec. 1580.115 Security training and knowledge for security-sensitive
employees.
(a) Training required for security-sensitive employees. No owner/
operator required to have a security training program under Sec.
1580.101 of this part may use a security-sensitive employee to perform
a function identified in Appendix B to this part, unless that
individual has received training as part of a security training program
approved by TSA under 49 CFR part 1570, subpart B, or is under the
direct supervision of an employee who has received the training
required by this section as applicable to that security-sensitive
function.
(b) Limits on use of untrained employees. Notwithstanding paragraph
(a) of this section, a security-sensitive employee may not perform a
security-sensitive function for more than sixty (60) calendar days
without receiving security training.
(c) Prepare. (1) Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees with position- or
[[Page 16508]]
function-specific responsibilities under the owner/operator's security
program has knowledge of how to fulfill those responsibilities in the
event of a security threat, breach, or incident to ensure--
(i) Employees with responsibility for transportation security
equipment and systems are aware of their responsibilities and can
verify the equipment and systems are operating and properly maintained;
and
(ii) Employees with other duties and responsibilities under the
company's security plans and/or programs, including those required by
Federal law, know their assignments and the steps or resources needed
to fulfill them.
(2) Each employee who performs any security-related functions under
Sec. 1580.205 of this subpart must be provided training specifically
applicable to the functions the employee performs. As applicable, this
training must address--
(i) Inspecting rail cars for signs of tampering or compromise,
IEDs, suspicious items, and items that do not belong;
(ii) Identification of rail cars that contain rail security-
sensitive materials, including the owner/operator's procedures for
identifying rail security-sensitive material cars on train documents,
shipping papers, and in computer train/car management systems; and
(iii) Procedures for completing transfer of custody documentation.
(d) Observe. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees has knowledge of the observational skills
necessary to recognize--
(1) Suspicious and/or dangerous items (such as substances,
packages, or conditions (for example, characteristics of an IED and
signs of equipment tampering or sabotage);
(2) Combinations of actions and individual behaviors that appear
suspicious and/or dangerous, inappropriate, inconsistent, or out of the
ordinary for the employee's work environment, which could indicate a
threat to transportation security; and
(3) How a terrorist or someone with malicious intent may attempt to
gain sensitive information or take advantage of vulnerabilities.
(e) Assess. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees has knowledge necessary to--
(1) Determine whether the item, individual, behavior, or situation
requires a response as a potential terrorist threat based on the
respective transportation environment; and
(2) Identify appropriate responses based on observations and
context.
(f) Respond. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees has knowledge of how to--
(1) Appropriately report a security threat, including knowing how
and when to report internally to other employees, supervisors, or
management, and externally to local, state, or Federal agencies
according to the owner/operator's security procedures or other relevant
plans;
(2) Interact with the public and first responders at the scene of
the threat or incident, including communication with passengers on
evacuation and any specific procedures for individuals with
disabilities and the elderly; and
(3) Use any applicable self-defense devices or other protective
equipment provided to employees by the owner/operator.
Subpart C--Operations
Sec. 1580.201 Applicability.
This subpart applies to the following:
(1) Each owner/operator described in Sec. 1580.1(a)(1) of this
part that transports one or more of the categories and quantities of
rail security-sensitive materials.
(2) Each owner/operator described in Sec. 1580.1(a)(2) and (3) of
this part.
Sec. 1580.203 Location and shipping information.
(a) General requirement. Each owner/operator described in Sec.
1580.201 of this part must have procedures in place to determine the
location and shipping information for each rail car under its physical
custody and control that contains one or more of the categories and
quantities of rail security-sensitive materials.
(b) Required information. The location and shipping information
must include the following:
(1) The rail car's current location by city, county, and state,
including, for freight railroad carriers, the railroad milepost, track
designation, and the time that the rail car's location was determined.
(2) The rail car's routing, if a freight railroad carrier.
(3) A list of the total number of rail cars containing rail
security-sensitive materials, broken down by--
(i) The shipping name prescribed for the material in column 2 of
the table in 49 CFR 172.101;
(ii) The hazard class or division number prescribed for the
material in column 3 of the table in 49 CFR 172.101; and
(iii) The identification number prescribed for the material in
column 4 of the table in 49 CFR 172.101.
(4) Each rail car's initial and number.
(5) Whether the rail car is in a train, rail yard, siding, rail
spur, or rail hazardous materials shipper or receiver facility,
including the name of the rail yard or siding designation.
(c) Timing-Class I freight railroad carriers. Upon request by TSA,
each Class I freight railroad carrier described in paragraph (a) of
this section must provide the location and shipping information to TSA
no later than--
(1) Five minutes if the request applies to a single (one) rail car;
and
(2) Thirty minutes if the request concerns multiple rail cars or a
geographic region.
(d) Timing-other than Class I freight railroad carriers. Upon
request by TSA, all owner/operators described in paragraph (a) of this
section, other than Class I freight railroad carriers, must provide the
location and shipping information to TSA no later than 30 minutes,
regardless of the number of cars covered by the request.
(e) Method. All owner/operators described in paragraph (a) of this
section must provide the requested location and shipping information to
TSA by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronic data transmission in spreadsheet format.
(2) Electronic data transmission in Hyper Text Markup Language
(HTML) format.
(3) Electronic data transmission in Extensible Markup Language
(XML).
(4) Facsimile transmission of a hard copy spreadsheet in tabular
format.
(5) Posting the information to a secure website address approved by
TSA.
(6) Another format approved by TSA.
(f) Telephone number. Each owner/operator described in Sec.
1580.201 of this part must provide a telephone number for use by TSA to
request the information required in paragraph (b) of this section.
(1) The telephone number must be monitored at all times.
(2) A telephone number that requires a call back (such as an
answering service, answering machine, or beeper device) does not meet
the requirements of this paragraph.
Sec. 1580.205 Chain of custody and control requirements.
(a) Within or outside of an HTUA, rail hazardous materials shipper
transferring to carrier. Except as provided in paragraph (g) of this
section, at each location within or outside of an HTUA, a rail
hazardous materials shipper transferring custody of
[[Page 16509]]
a rail car containing one or more of the categories and quantities of
rail security-sensitive materials to a freight railroad carrier must do
the following:
(1) Physically inspect the rail car before loading for signs of
tampering, including closures and seals; other signs that the security
of the car may have been compromised; and suspicious items or items
that do not belong, including the presence of an improvised explosive
device.
(2) Keep the rail car in a rail secure area from the time the
security inspection required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section or by
49 CFR 173.31(d), whichever occurs first, until the freight railroad
carrier takes physical custody of the rail car.
(3) Document the transfer of custody to the railroad carrier in
hard copy or electronically.
(b) Within or outside of an HTUA, carrier receiving from a rail
hazardous materials shipper. At each location within or outside of an
HTUA where a freight railroad carrier receives from a rail hazardous
materials shipper custody of a rail car containing one or more of the
categories and quantities of rail security-sensitive materials, the
freight railroad carrier must document the transfer in hard copy or
electronically and perform the required security inspection in
accordance with 49 CFR 174.9.
(c) Within an HTUA, carrier transferring to carrier. Within an
HTUA, whenever a freight railroad carrier transfers a rail car
containing one or more of the categories and quantities of rail
security-sensitive materials to another freight railroad carrier, each
freight railroad carrier must adopt and carry out procedures to ensure
that the rail car is not left unattended at any time during the
physical transfer of custody. These procedures must include the
receiving freight railroad carrier performing the required security
inspection in accordance with 49 CFR 174.9. Both the transferring and
the receiving railroad carrier must document the transfer of custody in
hard copy or electronically.
(d) Outside of an HTUA, carrier transferring to carrier. Outside an
HTUA, whenever a freight railroad carrier transfers a rail car
containing one or more of the categories and quantities of rail
security-sensitive materials to another freight railroad carrier, and
the rail car containing this hazardous material may subsequently enter
an HTUA, each freight railroad carrier must adopt and carry out
procedures to ensure that the rail car is not left unattended at any
time during the physical transfer of custody. These procedures must
include the receiving railroad carrier performing the required security
inspection in accordance with 49 CFR 174.9. Both the transferring and
the receiving railroad carrier must document the transfer of custody in
hard copy or electronically.
(e) Within an HTUA, carrier transferring to rail hazardous
materials receiver. A freight railroad carrier delivering a rail car
containing one or more of the categories and quantities of rail
security-sensitive materials to a rail hazardous materials receiver
located within an HTUA must not leave the rail car unattended in a non-
secure area until the rail hazardous materials receiver accepts custody
of the rail car. Both the railroad carrier and the rail hazardous
materials receiver must document the transfer of custody in hard copy
or electronically.
(f) Within an HTUA, rail hazardous materials receiver receiving
from carrier. Except as provided in paragraph (j) of this section, a
rail hazardous materials receiver located within an HTUA that receives
a rail car containing one or more of the categories and quantities of
rail security-sensitive materials from a freight railroad carrier
must--
(1) Ensure that the rail hazardous materials receiver or railroad
carrier maintains positive control of the rail car during the physical
transfer of custody of the rail car;
(2) Keep the rail car in a rail secure area until the car is
unloaded; and
(3) Document the transfer of custody from the railroad carrier in
hard copy or electronically.
(g) Within or outside of an HTUA, rail hazardous materials receiver
rejecting car. This section does not apply to a rail hazardous
materials receiver that does not routinely offer, prepare, or load for
transportation by rail one or more of the categories and quantities of
rail security-sensitive materials. If such a receiver rejects and
returns a rail car containing one or more of the categories and
quantities of rail security-sensitive materials to the originating
offeror or shipper, the requirements of this section do not apply to
the receiver. The requirements of this section do apply to any railroad
carrier to which the receiver transfers custody of the rail car.
(h) Document retention. Covered entities must maintain the
documents required under this section for at least 60 calendar days and
make them available to TSA upon request.
(i) Rail secure area. The rail hazardous materials shipper and the
rail hazardous materials receiver must use physical security measures
to ensure that no unauthorized individual gains access to the rail
secure area.
(j) Exemption for rail hazardous materials receivers. A rail
hazardous materials receiver located within an HTUA may request from
TSA an exemption from some or all of the requirements of this section
if the receiver demonstrates that the potential risk from its
activities is insufficient to warrant compliance with this section. TSA
will consider all relevant circumstances, including the following:
(1) The amounts and types of all hazardous materials received.
(2) The geography of the area surrounding the receiver's facility.
(3) Proximity to entities that may be attractive targets, including
other businesses, housing, schools, and hospitals.
(4) Any information regarding threats to the facility.
(5) Other circumstances that indicate the potential risk of the
receiver's facility does not warrant compliance with this section.
Sec. 1580.207 Harmonization of Federal regulation of nuclear
facilities.
TSA will coordinate activities under this subpart with the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Department of Energy (DOE) with
respect to regulation of rail hazardous materials shippers and
receivers that are also licensed or regulated by the NRC or DOE under
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, to maintain consistency with
the requirements imposed by the NRC and DOE.
Appendix A to Part 1580--High Threat Urban Areas (HTUAs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Urban area Geographic areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AZ................................... Phoenix Area........... Chandler, Gilbert, Glendale, Mesa, Peoria,
Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, and a 10-mile
buffer extending from the border of the
combined area.
CA................................... Anaheim/Santa Ana Area. Anaheim, Costa Mesa, Garden Grove, Fullerton,
Huntington Beach, Irvine, Orange, Santa Ana,
and a 10-mile buffer extending from the border
of the combined area.
[[Page 16510]]
Bay Area............... Berkeley, Daly City, Fremont, Hayward, Oakland,
Palo Alto, Richmond, San Francisco, San Jose,
Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Vallejo, and a 10-mile
buffer extending from the border of the
combined area.
Los Angeles/Long Beach Burbank, Glendale, Inglewood, Long Beach, Los
Area. Angeles, Pasadena, Santa Monica, Santa Clarita,
Torrance, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, and a 10-
mile buffer extending from the border of the
combined area.
Sacramento Area........ Elk Grove, Sacramento, and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined area.
San Diego Area......... Chula Vista, Escondido, and San Diego, and a 10-
mile buffer extending from the border of the
combined area.
CO................................... Denver................. Arvada, Aurora, Denver, Lakewood, Westminster,
Area................... Thornton, and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the border of the combined area.
DC................................... National Capital Region National Capital Region and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined area.
FL................................... Fort Lauderdale Area... Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood, Miami Gardens,
Miramar, Pembroke Pines, and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined area.
Jacksonville Area...... Jacksonville and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
Miami Area............. Hialeah, Miami, and a 10-mile buffer extending
from the border of the combined area.
Orlando Area........... Orlando and a 10-mile buffer extending from the
city border.
Tampa Area............. Clearwater, St. Petersburg, Tampa, and a 10-mile
buffer extending from the border of the
combined area.
GA................................... Atlanta Area........... Atlanta and a 10-mile buffer extending from the
city border.
HI................................... Honolulu Area.......... Honolulu and a 10-mile buffer extending from the
city border.
IL................................... Chicago Area........... Chicago and a 10-mile buffer extending from the
city border.
IN................................... Indianapolis Area...... Indianapolis and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
KY................................... Louisville Area........ Louisville and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
LA................................... Baton Rouge Area....... Baton Rouge and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
New Orleans Area....... New Orleans and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
MA................................... Boston Area............ Boston, Cambridge, and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined area.
MD................................... Baltimore Area......... Baltimore and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
MI................................... Detroit Area........... Detroit, Sterling Heights, Warren, and a 10-mile
buffer extending from the border of the
combined area.
MN................................... Twin Cities Area....... Minneapolis, St. Paul, and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined
entity.
MO................................... Kansas City Area....... Independence, Kansas City (MO), Kansas City
(KS), Olathe, Overland Park, and a 10-mile
buffer extending from the border of the
combined area.
St. Louis Area......... St. Louis and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
NC................................... Charlotte Area......... Charlotte and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
NE................................... Omaha Area............. Omaha and a 10-mile buffer extending from the
city border.
NJ................................... Jersey City/Newark Area Elizabeth, Jersey City, Newark, and a 10-mile
buffer extending from the border of the
combined area.
NV................................... Las Vegas Area......... Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined
entity.
NY................................... Buffalo Area........... Buffalo and a 10-mile buffer extending from the
city border.
New York City Area..... New York City, Yonkers, and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined area.
OH................................... Cincinnati Area........ Cincinnati and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
Cleveland Area......... Cleveland and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
Columbus Area.......... Columbus and a 10-mile buffer extending from the
city border.
Toledo Area............ Oregon, Toledo, and a 10-mile buffer extending
from the border of the combined area.
OK................................... Oklahoma City Area..... Norman, Oklahoma and a 10-mile buffer extending
from the border of the combined area.
OR................................... Portland Area.......... Portland, Vancouver, and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined area.
PA................................... Philadelphia Area...... Philadelphia and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
Pittsburgh Area........ Pittsburgh and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
TN................................... Memphis Area........... Memphis and a 10-mile buffer extending from the
city border.
TX................................... Dallas/Fort Worth/ Arlington, Carrollton, Dallas, Fort Worth,
Arlington Area. Garland, Grand Prairie, Irving, Mesquite,
Plano, and a 10-mile buffer extending from the
border of the combined area.
Houston Area........... Houston, Pasadena, and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined
entity.
San Antonio Area....... San Antonio and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
WA................................... Seattle Area........... Seattle, Bellevue, and a 10-mile buffer
extending from the border of the combined area.
WI................................... Milwaukee Area......... Milwaukee and a 10-mile buffer extending from
the city border.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix B to Part 1580--Security-Sensitive Functions for Freight Rail
This table identifies security-sensitive job functions for owner/
operators regulated under this part. All employees performing security-
sensitive functions are ``security-sensitive employees'' for purposes
of this rule and must be trained.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of job
Security-sensitive titles
Categories job functions for applicable to
freight rail these functions
*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Operating a vehicle........... 1. Employees who Engineer,
operate or directly conductor
control the
movements of
locomotives or
other self-powered
rail vehicles.
[[Page 16511]]
2. Train conductor,
trainman, brakeman,
or utility employee
or performs
acceptance
inspections,
couples and
uncouples rail
cars, applies
handbrakes, or
similar functions.
3. Employees covered
under the Federal
hours of service
laws as ``train
employees.'' See 49
U.S.C. 21101(5) and
21103..
B. Inspecting and maintaining Employees who Carman, car
vehicles. inspect or repair repairman, car
rail cars and inspector,
locomotives. engineer,
conductor.
C. Inspecting or maintaining 1. Employees who--.. Signalman,
building or transportation a. Maintain, signal
infrastructure. install, or inspect maintainer,
communications and track-man,
signal equipment.. gang foreman,
b. Maintain, bridge and
install, or inspect building
track and laborer,
structures, roadmaster,
including, but not bridge, and
limited to, building
bridges, trestles, inspector/
and tunnels.. operator.
2. Employees covered
under the Federal
hours of service
laws as ``signal
employees.'' See 49
U.S.C. 21101(3) and
21104.
D. Controlling dispatch or 1. Employees who--.. Yardmaster,
movement of a vehicle. a. Dispatch, direct, dispatcher,
or control the block
movement of trains.. operator,
b. Operate or bridge
supervise the operator.
operations of
moveable bridges..
c. Supervise the
activities of train
crews, car
movements, and
switching
operations in a
yard or terminal.
2. Employees covered
under the Federal
hours of service
laws as
``dispatching
service
employees.'' See 49
U.S.C. 21101(2) and
21105.
E. Providing security of the Employees who Police officer,
owner/operator's equipment and provide for the special agent;
property. security of the patrolman;
railroad carrier's watchman;
equipment and guard.
property, including
acting as a
railroad police
officer (as that
term is defined in
49 CFR 207.2).
F. Loading or unloading cargo or Includes, but is not Service track
baggage. limited to, employee.
employees that load
or unload hazardous
materials.
G. Interacting with travelling Employees of a Conductor,
public (on board a vehicle or freight railroad engineer,
within a transportation operating in agent.
facility). passenger service.
H. Complying with security 1. Employees who Security
programs or measures, including serve as security coordinator,
those required by Federal law. coordinators train master,
designated in Sec. assistant
1570.201 of this train master,
subchapter, as well roadmaster,
as any designated division
alternates or roadmaster.
secondary security
coordinators.
2. Employees who--..
a. Conduct training
and testing of
employees when the
training or testing
is required by
TSA's security
regulations.
b. Perform
inspections or
operations required
by Sec. 1580.205
of this subchapter..
c. Manage or direct
implementation of
security plan
requirements..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These job titles are provided solely as a resource to help understand
the functions described; whether an employee must be trained is based
upon the function, not the job title.
0
12. Add part 1582 to read as follows:
PART 1582--PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND PASSENGER RAILROAD SECURITY
Subpart A--General
Sec.
1582.1 Scope.
1582.3 Terms used in this part.
1582.5 Preemptive effect.
Subpart B--Security Programs
1582.101 Applicability.
1582.103 [Reserved]
1582.105 [Reserved]
1582.107 [Reserved]
1582.109 [Reserved]
1582.111 [Reserved]
1582.113 Security training program general requirements.
1582.115 Security training and knowledge for security-sensitive
employees.
Appendix A to Part 1582--Determinations for Public Transportation
and Passenger Railroads
[[Page 16512]]
Appendix B to Part 1582--Security-Sensitive Job Functions For Public
Transportation and Passenger Railroads
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114; Pub. L. 110-53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3,
2007) secs. 1402 (6 U.S.C. 1131), 1405 (6 U.S.C. 1134), and 1408 (6
U.S.C. 1137).
Subpart A--General
Sec. 1582.1 Scope.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, this part
includes requirements for the following persons. Specific sections in
this part provide detailed requirements.
(1) Each passenger railroad carrier.
(2) Each public transportation agency.
(3) Each operator of a rail transit system that is not operating on
track that is part of the general railroad system of transportation,
including heavy rail transit, light rail transit, automated guideway,
cable car, inclined plane, funicular, and monorail systems.
(4) Each tourist, scenic, historic, and excursion rail owner/
operator, whether operating on or off the general railroad system of
transportation.
(b) This part does not apply to a ferry system required to conduct
training pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 70103.
Sec. 1582.3 Terms used in this part.
In addition to the terms in Sec. Sec. 1500.3, 1500.5, and 1503.202
of subchapter A and Sec. 1570.3 of subchapter D of this chapter, the
following term applies to this part.
Security-sensitive employee means an employee whose
responsibilities for the owner/operator include one or more of the
security-sensitive job functions identified in appendix B to this part
if the security-sensitive function is performed in the United States or
in direct support of the common carriage of persons or property between
a place in the United States and any place outside of the United
States.
Sec. 1582.5 Preemptive effect.
Under 49 U.S.C. 20106, issuance of the passenger railroad and
public transportation regulations in this subchapter preempts any State
law, regulation, or order covering the same subject matter, except an
additional or more stringent law, regulation, or order that is
necessary to eliminate or reduce an essentially local security hazard;
that is not incompatible with a law, regulation, or order of the U.S.
Government; and that does not unreasonably burden interstate commerce.
Subpart B--Security Programs
Sec. 1582.101 Applicability.
The requirements of this subpart apply to the following:
(a) Amtrak (also known as the National Railroad Passenger
Corporation).
(b) Each owner/operator identified in Appendix A to this part.
(c) Each owner/operator described in Sec. 1582.1(a)(1) through (3)
of this part that serves as a host railroad to a freight operation
described in Sec. 1580.301 of this subchapter or to a passenger train
operation described in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this section.
Sec. 1582.103 [Reserved]
Sec. 1582.105 [Reserved]
Sec. 1582.107 [Reserved]
Sec. 1582.109 [Reserved]
Sec. 1582.111 [Reserved]
Sec. 1582.113 Security training program general requirements.
(a) Security training program required. Each owner/operator
identified in Sec. 1582.101 of this part is required to adopt and
carry out a security training program under this subpart.
(b) General requirements. The security training program must
include the following information:
(1) Name of owner/operator.
(2) Name, title, telephone number, and email address of the primary
individual to be contacted with regard to review of the security
training program.
(3) Number, by specific job function category identified in
Appendix B to this part, of security-sensitive employees trained or to
be trained.
(4) Implementation schedule that identifies a specific date by
which initial and recurrent security training required by Sec.
1570.111 of this subchapter will be completed.
(5) Location where training program records will be maintained.
(6) Curriculum or lesson plan, including learning objectives and
method of delivery (such as instructor-led or computer-based training)
for each course used to meet the requirements of Sec. 1582.115 of this
part. TSA may request additional information regarding the curriculum
during the review and approval process. If recurrent training under
Sec. 1570.111 of this subchapter is not the same as initial training,
a curriculum or lesson plan for the recurrent training will need to be
submitted and approved by TSA.
(7) Plan for ensuring supervision of untrained security-sensitive
employees performing functions identified in Appendix B to this part.
(8) Plan for notifying employees of changes to security measures
that could change information provided in previously provided training.
(9) Method(s) for evaluating the effectiveness of the security
training program in each area required by Sec. 1582.115 of this part.
(c) Relation to other training. (1) Training conducted by owner/
operators to comply other requirements or standards, such as emergency
preparedness training required by the Department of Transportation
(DOT) (49 CFR part 239) or other training for communicating with
emergency responders to arrange the evacuation of passengers, may be
combined with and used to satisfy elements of the training requirements
in this subpart.
(2) If the owner/operator submits a security training program that
relies on pre-existing or previous training materials to meet the
requirements of subpart B, the program submitted for approval must
include an index, organized in the same sequence as the requirements in
this subpart.
(d) Submission and implementation. The owner/operator must submit
and implement the security training program in accordance with the
schedules identified in Sec. Sec. 1570.109 and 1570.111 of this
subchapter.
Sec. 1582.115 Security training and knowledge for security-sensitive
employees.
(a) Training required for security-sensitive employees. No owner/
operator required to have a security training program under Sec.
1582.101 of this part may use a security-sensitive employee to perform
a function identified in appendix B to this part unless that individual
has received training as part of a security training program approved
by TSA under 49 CFR part 1570, subpart B, or is under the direct
supervision of an employee who has received the training required by
this section as applicable to that security-sensitive function.
(b) Limits on use of untrained employees. Notwithstanding paragraph
(a) of this section, a security-sensitive employee may not perform a
security-sensitive function for more than sixty (60) calendar days
without receiving security training.
(c) Prepare. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees with position- or function-specific
responsibilities under the owner/operator's security program have
knowledge of how to fulfill those
[[Page 16513]]
responsibilities in the event of a security threat, breach, or incident
to ensure--
(1) Employees with responsibility for transportation security
equipment and systems are aware of their responsibilities and can
verify the equipment and systems are operating and properly maintained;
and
(2) Employees with other duties and responsibilities under the
company's security plans and/or programs, including those required by
Federal law, know their assignments and the steps or resources needed
to fulfill them.
(d) Observe. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees has knowledge of the observational skills
necessary to recognize--
(1) Suspicious and/or dangerous items (such as substances,
packages, or conditions (for example, characteristics of an IED and
signs of equipment tampering or sabotage);
(2) Combinations of actions and individual behaviors that appear
suspicious and/or dangerous, inappropriate, inconsistent, or out of the
ordinary for the employee's work environment, which could indicate a
threat to transportation security; and
(3) How a terrorist or someone with malicious intent may attempt to
gain sensitive information or take advantage of vulnerabilities.
(e) Assess. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees has knowledge necessary to--
(1) Determine whether the item, individual, behavior, or situation
requires a response as a potential terrorist threat based on the
respective transportation environment; and
(2) Identify appropriate responses based on observations and
context.
(f) Respond. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees has knowledge of how to--
(1) Appropriately report a security threat, including knowing how
and when to report internally to other employees, supervisors, or
management, and externally to local, state, or Federal agencies
according to the owner/operator's security procedures or other relevant
plans;
(2) Interact with the public and first responders at the scene of
the threat or incident, including communication with passengers on
evacuation and any specific procedures for individuals with
disabilities and the elderly; and
(3) Use any applicable self-defense devices or other protective
equipment provided to employees by the owner/operator.
Appendix A to Part 1582--Determinations for Public Transportation and
Passenger Railroads
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Urban area Systems
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA Bay Area......... Alameda-Contra Costa Transit
District (AC Transit).
Altamont -Corridor Express
(ACE).
City and County of San
Francisco (San Francisco Bay
Area Rapid Transit District)
(BART).
Central Contra Costa Transit
Authority.
>Golden Gate Bridge, Highway
and Transportation District
(GGBHTD).
Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers
Board (PCJPB) (Caltrain).
San Francisco Municipal Railway
(MUNI) (San Francisco
Municipal Transportation
Agency).
San Mateo County Transit
District (San Mateo County
Transit Authority) (SamTrans).
Santa Clara Valley
Transportation Authority
(VTA).
Transbay Joint Powers
Authority.
Greater Los City of Los Angeles Department
Angeles Area of Transportation (LADOT)
(Los Angeles/ Foothill Transit.
Long Beach and Long Beach Transit (LBT).
Anaheim/Santa Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Ana urban Transportation Authority
Areas).. (LACMTA).
City of Montebello (Montebello
Bus Lines) (MBL).
Omnitrans (OMNI).
Orange County Transportation
Authority (OCTA).
City of Santa Monica (Santa
Monica's Big Blue Bus) (Big
Blue Bus).
Southern California Regional
Rail Authority (Metrolink).
DC/MD/VA Greater National Arlington County, Virginia
Capital Region (Arlington Transit).
(National City of Alexandria (Alexandria
Capital Region Transit Company) (Dash).
and Baltimore Fairfax County Department of
urban Areas).. Transportation--Fairfax
Connector Bus System.
Maryland Transit Administration
(MTA).
Montgomery County Department of
Transportation (Ride-On
Montgomery County Transit).
Potomac and Rappahannock
Transportation Commission.
Prince George's County
Department of Public Works and
Transportation (The Bus).
Virginia Railway Express (VRE).
Washington Metropolitan Area
Transit Authority (WMATA).
GA Atlanta Area..... Georgia Regional Transportation
Authority (GRTA, within State
Road and Tollway Authority
(SRTA)).
Metropolitan Atlanta
Rapid Transit
Authority (MARTA)..
IL/IN Chicago Area..... Chicago Transit Authority
(CTA).
Northeast Illinois Regional
Commuter Railroad Corporation
(Metra/NIRCRC).
Northern Indiana Commuter
Transportation District
(NICTD).
PACE Suburban Bus Company.
MA Boston Area...... Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority
(MBTA).
[[Page 16514]]
NY/NJ/CT New York City/ Connecticut Department of
Northern New Transportation (CDOT).
Jersey Area (New Connecticut Transit (Hartford
York City and Division and New Haven
Jersey City/ Divisions of CTTransit).
Newark urban Metropolitan Transportation
Areas). Authority (All Agencies).
New Jersey Transit Corp. (NJT).
New York City Department of
Transportation.
Port Authority Trans-Hudson
Corporation (Port Authority of
New York and New Jersey)
(PANYNJ) (excluding ferry).
Westchester County Department
of Transportation Bee-Line
System (The Bee-Line System).
PA/NJ Philadelphia Area Delaware River Port Authority
(DRPA)--Port Authority Transit
Corporation (PATCO).
Delaware Transit Corporation
(DTC).
New Jersey Transit Corp. (NJT)
(covered under NY).
Pennsylvania Department of
Transportation.
Southeastern Pennsylvania
Transportation Authority
(SEPTA).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix B to Part 1582--Security-Sensitive Job Functions For Public
Transportation and Passenger Railroads
This table identifies security-sensitive job functions for owner/
operators regulated under this part. All employees performing security-
sensitive functions are ``security-sensitive employees'' for purposes
of this rule and must be trained.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Security-sensitive job
functions for public
Categories transportation and passenger
railroads (PTPR)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Operating a vehicle 1. Employees who--
a. Operate or control the
movements of trains, other
rail vehicles, or transit
buses.
b. Act as train conductor,
trainman, brakeman, or utility
employee or performs
acceptance inspections,
couples and uncouples rail
cars, applies handbrakes, or
similar functions.
2. Employees covered under the
Federal hours of service laws
as ``train employees.'' See 49
U.S.C. 21101(5) and 21103.
B. Inspecting and maintaining vehicles Employees who--
1. Perform activities related
to the diagnosis, inspection,
maintenance, adjustment,
repair, or overhaul of
electrical or mechanical
equipment relating to
vehicles, including functions
performed by mechanics and
automotive technicians.
2. Provide cleaning services to
vehicles owned, operated, or
controlled by an owner/
operator regulated under this
subchapter.
C. Inspecting or maintaining building Employees who--
or transportation infrastructure. 1. Maintain, install, or
inspect communication systems
and signal equipment related
to the delivery of
transportation services.
2. Maintain, install, or
inspect track and structures,
including, but not limited to,
bridges, trestles, and
tunnels.
3. Provide cleaning services to
stations and terminals owned,
operated, or controlled by an
owner/operator regulated under
this subchapter that are
accessible to the general
public or passengers.
4. Provide maintenance services
to stations, terminals, yards,
tunnels, bridges, and
operation control centers
owned, operated, or controlled
by an owner/operator regulated
under this subchapter.
5. Employees covered under the
Federal hours of service laws
as ``signal employees.'' See
49 U.S.C. 21101(4) and 21104.
D. Controlling dispatch or movement of Employees who--
a vehicle. 1. Dispatch, report, transport,
receive or deliver orders
pertaining to specific
vehicles, coordination of
transportation schedules,
tracking of vehicles and
equipment.
2. Manage day-to-day management
delivery of transportation
services and the prevention
of, response to, and redress
of service disruptions.
3. Supervise the activities of
train crews, car movements,
and switching operations in a
yard or terminal.
4. Dispatch, direct, or control
the movement of trains or
buses.
5. Operate or supervise the
operations of moveable
bridges.
6. Employees covered under the
Federal hours of service laws
as ``dispatching service
employees.'' See 49 U.S.C.
21101(2) and 21105.
E. Providing security of the owner/ Employees who--
operator's equipment and property. 1. Provide for the security of
PTPR equipment and property,
including acting as a police
officer.
[[Page 16515]]
2. Patrol and inspect property
of an owner/operator regulated
under this subchapter to
protect the property,
personnel, passengers and/or
cargo.
F. Loading or unloading cargo or Employees who load, or oversee
baggage loading of, property tendered
by or on behalf of a passenger
on or off of a portion of a
train that will be
inaccessible to the passenger
while the train is in
operation.
G. Interacting with travelling public Employees who provide services
(on board a vehicle or within a to passengers on-board a train
transportation facility). or bus, including collecting
tickets or cash for fares,
providing information, and
other similar services.
Including:
1. On-board food or beverage
employees.
2. Functions on behalf of an
owner/operator regulated under
this subchapter that require
regular interaction with
travelling public within a
transportation facility, such
as ticket agents.
H. Complying with security programs or 1. Employees who serve as
measures, including those required by security coordinators
Federal law. designated in Sec. 1570.201
of this subchapter, as well as
any designated alternates or
secondary security
coordinators.
2. Employees who--
a. Conduct training and testing
of employees when the training
or testing is required by
TSA's security regulations.
b. Manage or direct
implementation of security
plan requirements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
13. Add part 1584 to read as follows:
PART 1584--HIGHWAY AND MOTOR CARRIER SECURITY
Subpart A--General
Sec.
1584.1 Scope.
1584.3 Terms used in this part.
Subpart B--Security Programs
1584.101 Applicability.
1584.103 [Reserved]
1584.105 [Reserved]
1584.107 [Reserved]
1584.109 [Reserved]
1584.111 [Reserved]
1584.113 Security training program general requirements.
1584.115 Security training and knowledge for security-sensitive
employees.
Appendix A to Part 1584--Urban Area Determinations for Over-the-Road
Buses
Appendix B to Part 1584--Security-Sensitive Job Functions For Over-the-
Road Buses
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114; Pub. L. 110-53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug.
3, 2007) secs. 1501 (6 U.S.C. 1151), 1531 (6 U.S.C. 1181), and 1534
(6 U.S.C. 1184).
Subpart A--General
Sec. 1584.1 Scope.
This part includes requirements for persons providing
transportation by an over-the-road bus (OTRB). Specific sections in
this part provide detailed requirements.
Sec. 1584.3 Terms used in this part.
In addition to the terms in Sec. Sec. 1500.3, 1500.5, and 1503.202
of subchapter A and Sec. 1570.3 of subchapter D of this chapter, the
following term applies to this part.
Security-sensitive employee means an employee whose
responsibilities for the owner/operator include one or more of the
security-sensitive job functions identified in Appendix B to this part
where the security-sensitive function is performed in the United States
or in direct support of the common carriage of persons or property
between a place in the United States and any place outside of the
United States.
Subpart B--Security Programs
Sec. 1584.101 Applicability.
The requirements of this subpart apply to each OTRB owner/operator
providing fixed-route service that originates, travels through, or ends
in a geographic location identified in appendix A to this part.
Sec. 1584.103 [Reserved]
Sec. 1584.105 [Reserved]
Sec. 1584.107 [Reserved]
Sec. 1584.109 [Reserved]
Sec. 1584.111 [Reserved]
Sec. 1584.113 Security training program general requirements.
(a) Security training program required. Each owner/operator
identified in Sec. 1584.101 of this part is required to adopt and
carry out a security training program under this subpart.
(b) General requirements. The security training program must
include the following information:
(1) Name of owner/operator.
(2) Name, title, telephone number, and email address of the primary
individual to be contacted with regard to review of the security
training program.
(3) Number, by specific job function category identified in
Appendix B to this part, of security-sensitive employees trained or to
be trained.
(4) Implementation schedule that identifies a specific date by
which initial and recurrent security training required by Sec.
1570.111 of this subchapter will be completed.
(5) Location where training program records will be maintained.
(6) Curriculum or lesson plan, including learning objectives and
method of delivery (such as instructor-led or computer-based training)
for each course used to meet the requirements of Sec. 1584.115 of this
part. TSA may request additional information regarding the curriculum
during the review and approval process. If recurrent training under
Sec. 1570.111 of this subchapter is not the same as initial training,
a curriculum or lesson plan for the recurrent training will need to be
submitted and approved by TSA.
(7) Plan for ensuring supervision of untrained security-sensitive
employees performing functions identified in Appendix B to this part.
(8) Plan for notifying employees of changes to security measures
that could change information provided in previously provided training.
(9) Method(s) for evaluating the effectiveness of the security
training program in each area required by Sec. 1584.115 of this part.
(c) Relation to other training. (1) Training conducted by owner/
operators to comply other requirements or standards may be combined
with and used to satisfy elements of the training requirements in this
subpart.
[[Page 16516]]
(2) If the owner/operator submits a security training program that
relies on pre-existing or previous training materials to meet the
requirements of subpart B, the program submitted for approval must
include an index, organized in the same sequence as the requirements in
this subpart.
(d) Submission and Implementation. The owner/operator must submit
and implement the security training program in accordance with the
schedules identified in Sec. Sec. 1570.109 and 1570.111 of this
subchapter.
Sec. 1584.115 Security training and knowledge for security-sensitive
employees.
(a) Training required for security-sensitive employees. No owner/
operator required to have a security training program under Sec.
1584.101 of this part may use a security-sensitive employee to perform
a function identified in Appendix B to this part unless that individual
has received training as part of a security training program approved
by TSA under 49 CFR part 1570, subpart B, or is under the direct
supervision of an employee who has received the training required by
this section as applicable to that security-sensitive function.
(b) Limits on use of untrained employees. Notwithstanding paragraph
(a) of this section, a security-sensitive employee may not perform a
security-sensitive function for more than sixty (60) calendar days
without receiving security training.
(c) Prepare. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees with position- or function-specific
responsibilities under the owner/operator's security program have
knowledge of how to fulfill those responsibilities in the event of a
security threat, breach, or incident to ensure--
(1) Employees with responsibility for transportation security
equipment and systems are aware of their responsibilities and can
verify the equipment and systems are operating and properly maintained;
and
(2) Employees with other duties and responsibilities under the
company's security plans and/or programs, including those required by
Federal law, know their assignments and the steps or resources needed
to fulfill them.
(d) Observe. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees has knowledge of the observational skills
necessary to recognize--
(1) Suspicious and/or dangerous items (such as substances,
packages, or conditions (for example, characteristics of an IED and
signs of equipment tampering or sabotage);
(2) Combinations of actions and individual behaviors that appear
suspicious and/or dangerous, inappropriate, inconsistent, or out of the
ordinary for the employee's work environment, which could indicate a
threat to transportation security; and
(3) How a terrorist or someone with malicious intent may attempt to
gain sensitive information or take advantage of vulnerabilities.
(e) Assess. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees has knowledge necessary to--
(1) Determine whether the item, individual, behavior, or situation
requires a response as a potential terrorist threat based on the
respective transportation environment; and
(2) Identify appropriate responses based on observations and
context.
(f) Respond. Each owner/operator must ensure that each of its
security-sensitive employees has knowledge of how to--
(1) Appropriately report a security threat, including knowing how
and when to report internally to other employees, supervisors, or
management, and externally to local, state, or Federal agencies
according to the owner/operator's security procedures or other relevant
plans;
(2) Interact with the public and first responders at the scene of
the threat or incident, including communication with passengers on
evacuation and any specific procedures for individuals with
disabilities and the elderly; and
(3) Use any applicable self-defense devices or other protective
equipment provided to employees by the owner/operator.
Appendix A to Part 1584--Urban Area Determinations for Over-the-Road
Buses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Urban area Geographic areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA Anaheim/Los Los Angeles and Orange
Angeles/Long Counties.
Beach/Santa Ana
Areas.
San Diego Area... San Diego County.
San Francisco Bay Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin,
Area. San Francisco, and San Mateo
Counties.
DC (VA, MD, and WV). National Capital District of Columbia; Counties
Region. of Calvert, Charles,
Frederick, Montgomery, and
Prince George's, MD; Counties
of Arlington, Clarke, Fairfax,
Fauquier, Loudoun, Prince
William, Spotsylvania,
Stafford, and Warren County,
VA; Cities of Alexandria,
Fairfax, Falls Church,
Fredericksburg, Manassas, and
Manassas Park City, VA;
Jefferson County, WV.
IL/IN Chicago Area..... Counties of Cook, DeKalb,
DuPage, Grundy, Kane, Kendall,
Lake, McHenry, and Will, IL;
Counties of Jasper, Lake,
Newton, and Porter, IN;
Kenosha County, WI.
MA Boston Area...... Counties of Essex, Norfolk,
Plymouth, Suffolk, Middlesex,
MA; Counties of Rockingham and
Strafford, NH.
NY (NJ and PA)...... New York City/ Counties of Bronx, Kings,
Jersey City/ Nassau, New York, Putnam,
Newark Area. Queens, Richmond, Rockland,
Suffolk, and Westchester, NY;
Counties of Bergen, Essex,
Hudson, Hunterdon, Ocean,
Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris,
Passaic, Somerset, Sussex, and
Union, NJ; Pike County, PA.
PA (DE and NJ)...... Philadelphia Area/ Counties of Burlington, Camden,
Southern New and Gloucester, NJ; Counties
Jersey Area. of Bucks, Chester, Delaware,
Montgomery, and Philadelphia,
PA; New Castle County, DE;
Cecil County, MD; Salem
County, NJ.
TX Dallas Fort Worth/ Collin, Dallas, Delta, Denton,
Arlington Area. Ellis, Hunt, Kaufman,
Rockwall, Johnson, Parker,
Tarrant, and Wise Counties,
TX.
Houston Area..... Austin, Brazoria, Chambers,
Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris,
Liberty, Montgomery, San
Jacinto, and Waller Counties,
TX.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 16517]]
Appendix B to Part 1584--Security-Sensitive Job Functions for Over-the-
Road Buses
This table identifies security-sensitive job functions for owner/
operators regulated under this part. All employees performing security-
sensitive functions are ``security-sensitive employees'' for purposes
of this rule and must be trained.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Security-sensitive job functions for over-
Categories the-road buses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Operating a vehicle Employees who have a CDL and operate an
OTRB.
B. Inspecting and maintaining Employees who--
vehicles.
1. Perform activities related to the
diagnosis, inspection, maintenance,
adjustment, repair, or overhaul of
electrical or mechanical equipment
relating to vehicles, including
functions performed by mechanics and
automotive technicians.
2. Does not include cleaning or
janitorial activities.
C. Inspecting or maintaining Employees who--
building or transportation 1. Provide cleaning services to areas of
infrastructure. facilities owned, operated, or
controlled by an owner/operator
regulated under this subchapter that are
accessible to the general public or
passengers.
2. Provide cleaning services to vehicles
owned, operated, or controlled by an
owner/operator regulated under this part
(does not include vehicle maintenance).
3. Provide general building maintenance
services to buildings owned, operated,
or controlled by an owner/operator
regulated under this part.
D. Controlling dispatch or Employees who--
movement of a vehicle. 1. Dispatch, report, transport, receive
or deliver orders pertaining to specific
vehicles, coordination of transportation
schedules, tracking of vehicles and
equipment.
2. Manage day-to-day delivery of
transportation services and the
prevention of, response to, and redress
of disruptions to these services.
3. Perform tasks requiring access to or
knowledge of specific route information.
E. Providing security of the Employees who patrol and inspect property
owner/operator's equipment of an owner/operator regulated under
and property. this part to protect the property,
personnel, passengers and/or cargo.
F. Loading or unloading cargo Employees who load, or oversee loading
or baggage. of, property tendered by or on behalf of
a passenger on or off of a portion of a
bus that will be inaccessible to the
passenger while the vehicle is in
operation.
G. Interacting with Employees who--
travelling public (on board 1. Provide services to passengers on-
a vehicle or within a board a bus, including collecting
transportation facility). tickets or cash for fares, providing
information, and other similar services.
2. Includes food or beverage employees,
tour guides, and functions on behalf of
an owner/operator regulated under this
part that require regular interaction
with travelling public within a
transportation facility, such as ticket
agents.
H. Complying with security 1. Employees who serve as security
programs or measures, coordinators designated in Sec.
including those required by 1570.201 of this subchapter, as well as
Federal law. any designated alternates or secondary
security coordinators.
2. Employees who--
a. Conduct training and testing of
employees when the training or testing
is required by TSA's security
regulations.
b. Manage or direct implementation of
security plan requirements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: February 28, 2020.
David P. Pekoske,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-05126 Filed 3-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-05-P