[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 226 (Friday, November 22, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64447-64452]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24822]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Part 243

[Docket No. FRA-2019-0095, Notice No. 1]
RIN 2130-AC86

Training, Qualification, and Oversight for Safety-Related
Railroad Employees

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: In response to a petition for rulemaking, FRA proposes
amending its regulation on Training, Qualification, and Oversight for
Safety-Related Railroad Employees by delaying the regulation's
implementation dates for all contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not intercity or commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours annually or more.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed rule must be received by
December 23, 2019. FRA will consider comments received after that date
to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by docket number FRA-2019-
0095 and RIN 2130-AC86, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for submitting
comments;
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. DOT, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, W12-140, Washington, DC 20590;
     Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility, located in Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, U.S. DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays; or
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number (Federal Railroad Administration, FRA-2019-0095) or
Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this rulemaking (2130-AC86).
All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov; this includes any personal information. Please see
the Privacy Act heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document for Privacy Act information related to any submitted
comments or materials.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents,
petitions for reconsideration, or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for accessing
the docket or visit the Docket Management Facility described above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert J. Castiglione, Staff Director
-Human Performance Division, Federal Railroad Administration, 4100
International Plaza, Suite 450, Fort Worth, TX 76109-4820 (telephone:
817-447-2715); or Alan H. Nagler, Senior Attorney, Federal Railroad
Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 7, 2014, FRA published a final
rule (2014 Final Rule) that established minimum training standards for
each category and subcategory of safety-related railroad employees and
required railroad carriers, contractors, and subcontractors to submit
training programs to FRA for approval. See 79 FR 66459. The 2014 Final
Rule was required by section 401(a) of the Rail Safety Improvement Act
of 2008 (RSIA), Public Law 110-432, 122 Stat. 4883 (Oct. 16, 2008),
codified at 49 U.S.C. 20162. The Secretary of Transportation delegated
the authority to conduct this rulemaking and implement the rule to the
Federal Railroad Administrator. 49 CFR 1.89(b).
    On May 3, 2017, FRA delayed implementation dates in the 2014 Final
Rule by one year. On April 27, 2018, FRA responded to a petition for
reconsideration of that May 2017 rule by granting the American Short
Line and Regional Railroad Association's (ASLRRA) request to delay the
implementation dates by an additional year.

Petition for Rulemaking

    On June 27 and July 12, 2019, ASLRRA and the National Railroad
Construction and Maintenance Association, Inc. (NRC) (collectively
Associations) filed petitions for rulemaking that were docketed in the
U.S. DOT's Docket Management System as FRA-2019-0050. In the June 27,
2019 petition, ASLRRA and NRC request that FRA make several substantive
changes to the part 243 regulation. In that petition, ASLRRA and NRC
assert that as the regulation currently exists, it presents short line
and regional railroads and contractors with ``substantial and
unnecessary regulatory burdens'' and therefore additional regulatory
flexibility should be afforded to short line and regional railroads and
contractors. In the July 12, 2019 petition ASLRRA and NRC request that
FRA initiate a rulemaking to delay the implementation dates in part 243
as applicable to Class II and III railroads and contractors for two
years while FRA considers its June 27, 2019 petition. In the
alternative, ASLRRA and NRC ask that FRA suspend the current
implementation dates as applied to Class II and III railroads and
contractors.
    ASLRRA and NRC take the position that even though some of their
members are not small entities by FRA's definition of fewer than
400,000 total employee work hours annually, these other entities will
likely implement model programs in the same way as the small entities,
rather than develop their own programs as is expected for Class I
railroads. In the June 27, 2019 petition, the Associations state that
Class II regional railroads are more like Class III shortlines in terms
of structure, resources, and operations than Class I railroads. For
example, Class II regional railroads operate trains for shorter
distances and at lower speeds than Class I railroads. Class II regional
railroads also were described in the June 27, 2019 petition as
typically having fewer managerial layers and without their own training
facilities, which would further differentiate them from Class I
railroads. That petition also asserts that even large contractors are
often not comparable to Class I railroads considering that a
contractor's workforce is likely to be more spreadout, resulting in the
contractor incurring greater implementation costs and stretched
resources than a Class I railroad. Further, the June 27, 2019 petition
states that FRA's regulation treats medium and large contractors the
same as a Class I railroad even if the contractor's railroad-related
work is only a small percentage of its work and is equal to that of a
small entity contractor.

FRA's Response

    In the 2014 Final Rule's Regulatory Impact Analysis (2014 RIA), FRA
made certain assumptions. For instance, FRA assumed that all seven
Class I freight railroads, all 26 commuter railroads, and two intercity
passenger railroads would not rely on model programs. Another
assumption in the 2014 RIA was that 10 other entities (5 Class II
railroads, 2 Class III railroads, and 3 contractors) would not rely on
model programs. Thus, FRA agrees with the premise in ASLRRA and NRC's
June 27, 2019 petition that, except for the approximately 45 employers
who FRA estimated would develop their own programs, it is likely that
the remainder will implement model programs because doing so would
minimize costs for each employer. Treating this remainder group of
employers in the same manner as the small entities would therefore
reflect a more consistent approach to those employers adopting model
programs.
    In responding to the petitions for rulemaking, FRA is proposing to
delay the implementation dates in the rule for all contractors, and
those Class II and III railroads that are not intercity or commuter
passenger railroads with 400,000 total employee work hours

annually or more. However, FRA does not agree with the request in
ASLRRA and NRC's petition to propose delaying all the implementation
dates for an additional two years or to suspend the rule indefinitely
while FRA considers the other requests in the June 27, 2019 petition.
    FRA's proposed response is specifically targeted to equalize the
implementation dates for those employers most likely to adopt model
programs rather than develop their own programs as FRA identified in
the 2014 RIA. The reason for this specifically targeted proposed rule
is that FRA is considering whether to initiate a separate rulemaking
which would be limited to amending FRA's training regulation so that
the regulatory text includes the latest guidance that is intended to
help small entities and other users of model training programs. Thus,
without any changes to the implementation dates, the targeted employers
might not understand that the regulation contains more flexibility than
is commonly understood or they may not feel comfortable following the
guidance believing there is regulatory uncertainty.
    FRA understands that many regulated entities are on schedule to
meet the deadlines in the part 243 regulation. For those regulated
entities that are prepared to move forward in advance of any deadline,
there is certainly no prohibition against doing so and implementing a
compliant training program earlier than required should benefit the
overall safety of those employers' operations.
    In consideration of the foregoing, FRA is proposing to reclassify
those employers that FRA anticipates will likely adopt a model program
so that they have the same implementation deadlines as the small
entities. For purposes of this proposed rule, the Class II and III
railroads and the contractors who would get relief provide training and
operations in a manner more similar to that of a small entity than a
Class I railroad thereby justifying delays in the implementation
schedule. The proposed implementation date delays will not impact the
Class I railroads, and those commuter and intercity passenger railroads
with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more.

Section-by-Section Analysis

Subpart B--Program Components and Approval Process

Section 243.101 Employer Program Required

    FRA proposes to amend the implementation date in Sec.
243.101(a)(1) so that it is limited to Class I railroads, and those
intercity or commuter passenger railroads with 400,000 total employee
work hours annually or more. Also, FRA proposes to amend this section
so that all employers not covered by Sec.  243.101(a)(1) will now be
covered by Sec.  243.101(a)(2), unless the employer is commencing
operations after January 1, 2020 and would be covered by Sec.
243.101(b). In other words, Sec.  243.101(a)(1) would specifically
except all contractors, and those Class II and III railroads that are
not intercity or commuter passenger railroads with 400,000 total
employee work hours annually or more from complying with the January 1,
2020 training program submission implementation deadline. Instead,
under proposed Sec.  243.101(a)(2), all contractors, and those Class II
and III railroads that are not intercity or commuter passenger
railroads with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more, will
be required to comply with a training program submission deadline of
May 1, 2021. Thus, those entities that benefit from the proposed rule
will have an additional 16 months to submit a training program for
their safety-related railroad employees.

Subpart C--Program Implementation and Oversight Requirements

Section 243.201 Employee Qualification Requirements

    FRA proposes to amend the implementation dates in paragraphs (a)(1)
and (e)(1) of this section so that they are limited to Class I
railroads, and those intercity or commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours annually or more. Also, FRA proposes
to amend this section so that all employers not covered by Sec.
243.201 (a)(1) and (e)(1) will now be covered by Sec.  243.201(a)(2)
and (e)(2). Please note that an employer commencing operations after
January 1, 2020 would still be covered by Sec.  243.201(b) and would be
expected to implement a refresher training program upon commencing
operations.

Regulatory Impact and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This proposed rule is a non-significant regulatory action within
the meaning of Executive Order 12866 and DOT policies and procedures.
See 44 FR 11034 (Feb. 26, 1979). The proposed rule also has followed
the guidance of Executive Order 13771, which directs agencies to reduce
regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that ``for every
one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified
for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently
managed and controlled through a budgeting process.'' This rulemaking
is a deregulatory action under Executive Order 13771, ``Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs.'' See 82 FR 9339, Jan. 30,
2017.
    As explained in the Supplementary Information section, FRA
published the 2014 Final Rule to fulfill a statutory mandate. On May 3,
2017, FRA delayed implementation dates in the 2014 Final Rule by one
year. On April 27, 2018, FRA responded to a petition for
reconsideration of that May 2017 rule by granting the ASLRRA's request
to delay the implementation dates an additional year. FRA is issuing a
proposed rulemaking targeted to equalize the implementation dates for
Class II railroads, Class III railroads, and contractors regardless of
their annual employee work hours with the exception of those intercity
or commuter passenger railroads with 400,000 total employee work hours
annually or more. With adoption of this proposed rule, the targeted
employers will have until May 1, 2021 to submit a training program to
FRA instead of the previous January 1, 2020 deadline which was
applicable to railroads (regardless of whether they were Class II or
III railroads), and contractors with 400,000 annual employee work hours
or more.
    FRA believes that the proposed rule will reduce the regulatory
burden on the railroad industry by delaying the implementation dates.
This proposed rule will extend the implementation deadlines for some
regulated entities by a total of 16 months from the 2018 request. This
proposed rule would be beneficial for regulated entities by adding time
for some railroads and contractors to comply.
    The costs arising from the training rule in 49 CFR part 243 over
the 20-year period considered include: The costs of revising training
programs to include ``hands-on'' training where appropriate, as well as
the costs of creating entirely new training programs for any employer
that does not have one already; the costs of customizing model training
programs for those employers that choose to adopt a model program
rather than create a new program; the costs of annual data review and
analysis required in order to improve training programs; the costs of
revising programs in later years; the costs of additional time new
employees may have to spend in initial training; the costs of
additional periodic oversight tests and inspections; the costs of
additional qualification tests; and the

costs of additional time all safety-related railroad employees may have
to spend in refresher training. FRA is proposing to reclassify those
employers that FRA anticipated in the 2014 RIA would likely adopt a
model program so that the regulation would reflect a more consistent
approach to those employers adopting model programs. Until the
petitions for rulemaking were filed, FRA did not appreciate that the
Class II and III railroads and the contractors who were not identified
as small entities could be expected to encounter the same types of
obstacles to training program implementation as that of a small entity.
The proposed implementation date delay will not impact Class I
railroads, and those commuter and intercity passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours annually or more. However, this rule
proposes to provide all contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not currently identified as small entities in part
243 or commuter or intercity passenger railroads with 400,000 total
employee work hours annually or more, with an additional 16 months to
submit a training program for their safety-related railroad employees.
FRA is also proposing that those same employers get an additional 16
months to designate each of their existing safety-related railroad
employees by occupational category or subcategory, and only permit
designated employees to perform safety-related service in that
occupational category or subcategory. Finally, FRA proposes that those
same employers get one additional year to complete refresher training
for each of their safety-related railroad employees. With this proposed
rule, the training program submission date for Class II railroads,
Class III railroads, and contractors regardless of their annual
employee work hours, with the exception of those intercity or commuter
passenger railroads with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or
more, would be delayed from January 1, 2020, to a new implementation
date of May 1, 2021; the designation of employee date would be delayed
from September 1, 2020, to a new implementation date of January 1,
2022; and, the deadline for the first refresher training cycle would be
delayed from December 31, 2024, to a new deadline of December 31, 2025.
    FRA believes that additional hands-on and refresher training will
reduce the frequency and severity of some future accidents and
incidents. Expected safety benefits were calculated using full accident
costs, which are based on past accident history, the values of
preventing future fatalities and injuries sustained, and the cost of
property damage. Full accident costs are determined by the number of
fatalities and injuries multiplied by their respective prevention
valuations, and the cost of property damage. By delaying the
implementation dates, all contractors, and those Class II and III
railroads that are not intercity or commuter passenger railroads with
400,000 total employee work hours annually or more will realize a cost
savings. All contractors, and those Class II and III railroads that are
not intercity or commuter passenger railroads with 400,000 total
employee work hours annually or more will not incur costs during the
first 16 months of this analysis. Also, costs incurred in future years
will be discounted an extra 16 months, which will decrease the present
value burden. The present value of costs would be less than if the
original implementation dates were maintained. FRA has estimated this
cost savings to be approximately $3.0 million, at a 7% discount rate,
for impacted railroads and contractors that will experience relief as a
result of this proposed rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., and
Executive Order 13272, 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002), require agency
review of proposed and final rules to assess their impact on small
entities. An agency must prepare an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis (IRFA) unless it determines and certifies that a rule, if
promulgated, would not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the FRA Administrator certifies that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    ``Small entity'' is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601 as including a small
business concern that is independently owned and operated, and is not
dominant in its field of operation. The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) has authority to regulate issues related to small
businesses, and stipulates in its size standards that a ``small
entity'' in the railroad industry is a for profit ``linehaul railroad''
that has fewer than 1,500 employees, a ``short line railroad'' with
fewer than 500 employees, or a ``commuter rail system'' with annual
receipts of less than 15 million dollars. See ``Size Eligibility
Provisions and Standards,'' 13 CFR part 121, subpart A. Additionally, 5
U.S.C. 601(5) defines as ``small entities'' governments of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special
districts with populations less than 50,000. Federal agencies may adopt
their own size standards for small entities, in consultation with SBA
and in conjunction with public comment. Pursuant to that authority, FRA
has published a final statement of agency policy that formally
establishes ``small entities'' or ``small businesses'' as being
railroads, contractors, and hazardous materials shippers that meet the
revenue requirements of a Class III railroad as set forth in 49 CFR
1201.1-1, which is $20 million or less in inflation-adjusted annual
revenues, and commuter railroads or small governmental jurisdictions
that serve populations of 50,000 or less. See 68 FR 24891 (May 9,
2003), codified at appendix C to 49 CFR part 209. The $20-million limit
is based on the Surface Transportation Board's revenue threshold for a
Class III railroad. Railroad revenue is adjusted for inflation by
applying a revenue deflator formula in accordance with 49 CFR 1201.1-1.
FRA is using this definition for this rulemaking.
    The requirements of this proposed rule would apply to employers of
safety-related railroad employees that FRA previously determined were
not small entities. This proposed rule would have no direct impact on
small units of government, businesses, or other organizations. State
rail agencies are not required to participate in this program. State
owned railroads would receive a positive impact by having additional
time to comply. Therefore, the proposed rule would not impact any small
entities. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(b),
the FRA Administrator hereby certifies that this proposed rule would
not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities. FRA requests comments on all aspects of this certification.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    There are no new collection of information requirements contained
in this proposed rule and, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements already contained in the 2014 Final Rule have been
approved by OMB. The OMB approval number is OMB No. 2130-0597. Thus,
FRA is not required to seek additional OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act.

Federalism Implications

    This proposed rule will not have a substantial effect on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Thus in accordance with Executive Order
13132, ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999), preparation of a
Federalism Assessment is not warranted.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from
engaging in any standards or related activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate
domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary
obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of international
standards and where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S.
standards.
    This proposed rule is purely domestic in nature and is not expected
to affect trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing business overseas or
for foreign firms doing business in the United States.

Environmental Impact

    FRA has evaluated this proposed rule in accordance with its
``Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts'' (FRA's Procedures)
(64 FR 28545, May 26, 1999) as required by the National Environmental
Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), other environmental statutes,
Executive Orders, and related regulatory requirements. FRA has
determined that this proposed rule is not a major FRA action, requiring
the preparation of an environmental impact statement or environmental
assessment, because it is categorically excluded from detailed
environmental review pursuant to section 4(c)(20) of FRA's Procedures.
See 64 FR 28547 (May 26, 1999).
    In accordance with section 4(c) and (e) of FRA's Procedures, the
agency has further concluded that no extraordinary circumstances exist
with respect to this proposed rule that might trigger the need for a
more detailed environmental review. As a result, FRA finds that this
proposed rule is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the
quality of the human environment.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Pursuant to section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each Federal agency shall, unless
otherwise prohibited by law, assess the effects of Federal regulatory
actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector
(other than to the extent that such regulations incorporate
requirements specifically set forth in law). Section 202 of the Act (2
U.S.C. 1532) further requires that before promulgating any general
notice of proposed rulemaking that is likely to result in the
promulgation of any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may
result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted
annually for inflation) in any 1 year, and before promulgating any
final rule for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was
published, the agency shall prepare a written statement detailing the
effect on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector.
This proposed rule will not result in such an expenditure, and thus
preparation of such a statement is not required.

Energy Impact

    Executive Order 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a
Statement of Energy Effects for any ``significant energy action.'' 66
FR 28355 (May 22, 2001). FRA evaluated this proposed rule in accordance
with Executive Order 13211, and determined that this regulatory action
is not a ``significant energy action'' within the meaning of the
Executive Order.
    Executive Order 13783, ``Promoting Energy Independence and Economic
Growth,'' requires Federal agencies to review regulations to determine
whether they potentially burden the development or use of domestically
produced energy resources, with particular attention to oil, natural
gas, coal, and nuclear energy resources. 82 FR 16093 (Mar. 31, 2017).
FRA determined this proposed rule will not burden the development or
use of domestically produced energy resources.

Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice, DOT/ALL-14 FDMS, accessible through
www.dot.gov/privacy. In order to facilitate comment tracking and
response, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the name of
their organization; however, submission of names is completely
optional. Whether or not commenters identify themselves, all timely
comments will be fully considered. If you wish to provide comments
containing proprietary or confidential information, please contact the
agency for alternate submission instructions.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 243

    Administrative practice and procedure, Penalties, Railroad
employees, Railroad safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

The Proposed Rule

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA proposes to amend
part 243 of chapter II, subtitle B of title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

PART 243--TRAINING, QUALIFICATION, AND OVERSIGHT FOR SAFETY-RELATED
RAILROAD EMPLOYEES [AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 243 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20131-20155, 20162, 20301-
20306, 20701-20702, 21301-21304, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; and 49
CFR 1.89.

Subpart B--Program Components and Approval Process

0
 2. Revise Sec.  243.101 paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  243.101  Employer program required.

    (a)(1) Effective January 1, 2020, each Class I railroad, and each
intercity or commuter passenger railroad conducting operations subject
to this part with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more,
shall submit, adopt, and comply with a training program for its safety-
related railroad employees.
    (2) Effective May 1, 2021, each employer conducting operations
subject to this part not covered by paragraph (a)(1) of this section
shall submit, adopt, and comply with a training program for its safety-
related railroad employees.
* * * * *

Subpart C--Program Implementation and Oversight Requirements

0
3. Revise Sec.  243.201 paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), and (e)(1) and (2)
to read as follows:

Sec.  243.201  Employee qualification requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (1) By no later than September 1, 2020, each Class I railroad, and
each intercity or commuter passenger railroad conducting operations
subject to this part with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or
more in operation as of January 1, 2020, shall declare the designation
of each of its

existing safety-related railroad employees by occupational category or
subcategory, and only permit designated employees to perform safety-
related service in that occupational category or subcategory. The
Associate Administrator may extend this period based on a written
request.
    (2) By no later than January 1, 2022, each employer conducting
operations subject to this part not covered by paragraph (a)(1) of this
section in operation as of January 1, 2021, shall declare the
designation of each of its existing safety-related railroad employees
by occupational category or subcategory, and only permit designated
employees to perform safety-related service in that occupational
category or subcategory. The Associate Administrator may extend this
period based on a written request.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) Beginning January 1, 2022, each Class I railroad, and each
intercity or commuter passenger railroad conducting operations subject
to this part with 400,000 total employee work hours annually or more,
shall deliver refresher training at an interval not to exceed 3
calendar years from the date of an employee's last training event,
except where refresher training is specifically required more
frequently in accordance with this chapter. If the last training event
occurs before FRA's approval of the employer's training program, the
employer shall provide refresher training either within 3 calendar
years from that prior training event or no later than December 31,
2024. Each employer shall ensure that, as part of each employee's
refresher training, the employee is trained and qualified on the
application of any Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and
orders the person is required to comply with, as well as any relevant
railroad rules and procedures promulgated to implement those Federal
railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders.
    (2) Beginning May 1, 2023, each employer conducting operations
subject to this part not covered by paragraph (e)(1) of this section
shall deliver refresher training at an interval not to exceed 3
calendar years from the date of an employee's last training event,
except where refresher training is specifically required more
frequently in accordance with this chapter. If the last training event
occurs before FRA's approval of the employer's training program, the
employer shall provide refresher training either within 3 calendar
years from that prior training event or no later than December 31,
2025. Each employer shall ensure that, as part of each employee's
refresher training, the employee is trained and qualified on the
application of any Federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and
orders the person is required to comply with, as well as any relevant
railroad rules and procedures promulgated to implement those Federal
railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Ronald L. Batory,
Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration.
[FR Doc. 2019-24822 Filed 11-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 39 (Monday, February 28, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 11079]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03539]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2021-N-0002]

New Animal Drugs; Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug
Application

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notification of withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is withdrawing approval
of a new animal drug application (NADA) at the sponsor's request
because the product is no longer manufactured or marketed.

DATES: The approval is withdrawn as of February 28, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sujaya Dessai, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-212), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Elanco US Inc., 2500 Innovation Way,
Greenfield, IN 46140, has requested that FDA withdraw approval of NADA
093-329 for use of a prolonged-release bolus containing sulfamethazine
in cattle because the product is no longer manufactured or marketed.
    Therefore, under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food
and Drugs and in accordance with Sec.  514.116 Notice of withdrawal of
approval of application (21 CFR 514.116), notice is given that approval
of NADA 093-329, and all supplements and amendments thereto, is hereby
withdrawn February 28, 2022.
    Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is amending
the animal drug regulations to reflect the voluntary withdrawal of
approval of this application.

    Dated: February 14, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-03539 Filed 2-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 2, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 60044]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24163]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0228]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Brandon Road Lock and Dam to Lake Michigan Including
Des Plaines River, Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Chicago River, and
Calumet-Saganashkee Channel, Chicago, IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a segment of the Safety Zone;
Brandon Road Lock and Dam to Lake Michigan including Des Plaines River,
Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Chicago River, Calumet-Saganashkee
Channel on all waters of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal from Mile
Marker 296.1 to Mile Marker 296.7 at various times from October 8, 2012
through October 12, 2012. This action is necessary to protect the
waterways, waterway users, and vessels from hazards associated with the
Army Corp of Engineers' barge safety testing operations.
    During any of the below listed enforcement periods, entry into,
transiting, mooring, laying-up or anchoring within the enforced area of
this safety zone by any person or vessel is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, or his or
her designated representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.930 will be enforced from 7 a.m.
to 11 a.m. and from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. on October 8 through 12, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email MST1 Joseph McCollum, Prevention Department, Coast Guard
Sector Lake Michigan, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    The Coast Guard will enforce a segment of the Safety Zone; Brandon
Road Lock and Dam to Lake Michigan including Des Plaines River, Chicago
Sanitary and Ship Canal, Chicago River, Calumet-Saganashkee Channel,
Chicago, IL, listed in 33 CFR 165.930. Specifically, the Coast Guard
will enforce this safety zone between Mile Marker 296.1 to Mile Marker
296.7 on all waters of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal. Enforcement
will occur from 7 a.m. until 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. until 5 p.m. on:
October 8 through 12, 2012.
    This enforcement action is necessary because the Captain of the
Port, Sector Lake Michigan has determined that the Army Corp of
Engineers' barge effects testing, involving the demonstration barrier,
barriers IIA and IIB, pose risks to life and property. The combination
of vessel traffic and the testing operations in the water makes the
controlling of vessels through the impacted portion of the Chicago
Sanitary and Ship Canal necessary to prevent injury and property loss.
    In accordance with the general regulations in Sec.  165.23 of this
part, entry into, transiting, mooring, laying up or anchoring within
the enforced area of this safety zone by any person or vessel is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake
Michigan, or his or her designated representative.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.930 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the
Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, will also provide notice
through other means, which may include, but are not limited to,
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, Local Notice to Mariners, local news
media, distribution in leaflet form, and on-scene oral notice.
    Additionally, the Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan, may
notify representatives from the maritime industry through telephonic
and email notifications.

    Dated: September 21, 2012.
M.W. Sibley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 2012-24163 Filed 10-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 114 (Monday, June 15, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34186-34188]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14480]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75131; File No. SR-ISE-2015-20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees

June 9, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on June 1,

2015, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (the ``Exchange'' or
the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission the
proposed rule change, as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The ISE proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees to increase the
maker fee charged to Market Maker and Non-ISE Market Maker orders in
Select Symbols when trading against Priority Customer complex orders
that leg in from the complex order book. The text of the proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.ise.com), at
the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to increase the maker
fee charged to Market Maker \3\ and Non-ISE Market Maker \4\ orders in
Select Symbols \5\ when trading against Priority Customer \6\ complex
orders that leg in from the complex order book. Market Maker orders
(other than Market Maker Plus orders) \7\ and Non-ISE Market Maker
orders currently pay a maker fee of $0.10 per contract for regular
orders in Select Symbols. This $0.10 per contract fee similarly applies
to all Market Maker orders (including Market Maker Plus orders) and
Non-ISE Market Maker orders when trading against Priority Customer
complex orders that leg in from the complex order book pursuant to Rule
715(k). At the same time, the Exchange charges a taker fee to Priority
Customer orders entered in the regular order book but provides a rebate
to Priority Customer orders entered in the complex order book. The
complex order rebates paid to Priority Customer orders, which apply
regardless of whether those orders are executed on the complex order
book or leg in to the regular order book, range from $0.30 per contract
for the lowest tier to $0.46 per contract for the highest. To better
align the fees charged for executing trades with the rebates paid out
by ISE, the Exchange proposes to increase the maker fee for Market
Maker (including Market Maker Plus) and Non-ISE Market Maker orders to
$0.30 per contract when trading against Priority Customer orders that
leg in from the complex order book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Market Makers'' refers to ``Competitive Market
Makers'' and ``Primary Market Makers'' collectively. See Rule
100(a)(25).
    \4\ A ``Non-ISE Market Maker'' is a market maker as defined in
Section 3(a)(38) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
registered in the same options class on another options exchange.
    \5\ ``Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols listed
on the ISE that are in the Penny Pilot Program.
    \6\ A ``Priority Customer'' is a person or entity that is not a
broker/dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s), as defined in ISE Rule 100(a)(37A).
    \7\ A Market Maker Plus is a Market Maker who is on the National
Best Bid or National Best Offer a specified percentage of the time
for series trading between $0.03 and $3.00 (for options whose
underlying stock's previous trading day's last sale price was less
than or equal to $100) and between $0.10 and $3.00 (for options
whose underlying stock's previous trading day's last sale price was
greater than $100) in premium in each of the front two expiration
months. The specified percentage is at least 80% but lower than 85%
of the time for Tier 1, at least 85% but lower than 95% of the time
for Tier 2, and at least 95% of the time for Tier 3. A Market
Maker's single best and single worst quoting days each month based
on the front two expiration months, on a per symbol basis, will be
excluded in calculating whether a Market Maker qualifies for this
rebate, if doing so will qualify a Market Maker for the rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\8\ in general, and Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that it is designed to provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fee change is reasonable
and equitable as it aligns the fees associated with trading against
legged-in Priority Customer orders with the rebates paid out by ISE. As
explained above, the Exchange offers significant rebates to Priority
Customer complex orders. This, combined with the low maker fees charged
to regular orders, results a negative rate per contract when Priority
Customer complex orders leg in to the regular order book. To reduce
these negative economics, the Exchange believes that it is appropriate
to increase the fees charged to Market Maker and Non-ISE Market Maker
orders that trade against Priority Customer complex orders that leg in
from the complex order book. In this regard, the Exchange notes that
the proposed maker fees are equivalent to the rebate provided to
Priority Customer complex orders that qualify for the lowest tier of
rebate, and will therefore help offset those rebates. The proposed fees
are also within the range of fees charged by other options exchanges,
including, for example, BOX Options Exchange LLC (``BOX''), which
charges a fee of $0.51 per contract for Market Maker orders in penny
pilot classes when trading against a Public Customer. The Exchange
notes that it is only proposing to increase the applicable maker fees
for Market Maker and Non-ISE Market Maker orders, and not for Firm
Proprietary \10\/Broker-Dealer \11\ or Professional Customer \12\
orders. The Exchange believes that this is not unfairly discriminatory
as Market Makers and Non-ISE Market Makers are responsible for the
majority of trading volume that executes against Priority Customer
orders that leg in from the complex order book and are sophisticated
enough to account for the higher fees that would be charged when
trading against such orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A ``Firm Proprietary'' order is an order submitted by a
member for its own proprietary account.
    \11\ A ``Broker-Dealer'' order is an order submitted by a member
for a broker-dealer account that is not its own proprietary account.
    \12\ A ``Professional Customer'' is a person or entity that is
not a broker/dealer and is not a Priority Customer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\13\ the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden
on intermarket or intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed
fees are designed to reduce the negative economics associated with
orders that leg in from the complex order book, and are not intended to
have any competitive impact. While the

proposed fee increase only applies to Market Maker and Non-ISE Market
Maker orders, the Exchange does not believe that this will have any
significant competitive impact as the proposed fees remain modest and
are well within the range of fees charged by other options exchanges.
The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which market
participants can readily direct their order flow to competing venues.
In such an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and
consider adjusting, its fees and rebates to remain competitive with
other exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed fee changes reflect this competitive environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \14\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\15\ because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by ISE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ISE-2015-20 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2015-20. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the ISE. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2015-20 and should be
submitted on or before July 6, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-14480 Filed 6-12-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 219 (Monday, November 14, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70348-70349]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29241]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0986]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Doullut Canal, Mile 0.2,
Plaquemines Parish, Empire, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
SR 11 Bridge over Doullut Canal, mile 0.2, Plaquemines Parish, Empire,
LA. This deviation will allow the draw to remain in the closed-to-
navigation position for the duration of the 2011 Orange King Festival
Bicycle Race.

DATES: This deviation is effective on December 3, 2011 from 8 a.m.
until noon.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0986 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0986 in the
``Keyword'' box and then clicking ``Search''. They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Jim Wetherington; Bridge Administration Branch, Eighth
Coast Guard District, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The subject bridge is the SR 11 Swing Bridge
across Doullut Canal at mile 0.2, in Empire, Plaquemines Parish, LA.
The vertical clearance is 3.3 feet above mean high water. Presently,
under 33 CFR 117.5, the draw of the SR 11 Swing Bridge across Doullut
Canal at mile 0.2, in Empire, shall open on signal.
    The owner requests the bridge be allowed to remain in the closed-
to-navigation position for the purpose of the running of the 2011
Orange King Festival Bike Race. This deviation is effective December 3,
2011 from 8 a.m. until noon. Coordination will be through Public Notice
and Local Notice to Mariners upon date of publication in the Federal
Register. This bridge will open for emergencies. In accordance with 33
CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating
schedule immediately at the end of the designated time period.
    This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under
33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: October 18, 2011.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-29241 Filed 11-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: September 8, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 172)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 46019-46020]
[DOCID:fr08se09-18]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 35

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2009-0617; FRL-8953-8]
RIN 2050-AG53

State and Local Assistance; Technical Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; Technical Correction.

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

SUMMARY: On June 16, 2009, regulations to include State Response
Programs and Tribal Response Programs under Section 128(a) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA) as among the Environmental Program Grants eligible for
inclusion in a Performance Partnership Grant (PPG) were published.
Those final rules included technical errors which this action corrects.

DATES: This rule is effective on September 8, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The mailing address of the Office of Brownfields and Land
Revitalization, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, is U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., MC
5105T, Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Virginia Fornillo, Office of Solid
Waste

and Emergency Response, Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization,
at<PHONE_NUMBER> (fornillo.virginia@ epa.gov), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0002, Mail Code 5105T.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    EPA's regulations implementing Performance Partnership Grants
(PPGs) are found at 40 CFR 35.101, 40 CFR 35.130-35.138, 40 CFR 35.501
and 40 CFR 35.530-35.538. On June 16, 2009 (74 FR 28443) EPA published
in the Federal Register a final rule that added State Response Programs
Section CERCLA 128(a) under 40 CFR part 35 subpart A and Tribal
Response Programs Section CERCLA 128(a) under 40 CFR part 35, subpart B
as a PPG eligible grant programs. The rule also adds State Response
Program and Tribal Response Program specific provisions to 40 CFR part
35, subparts A and B. This document corrects typographical errors in
references contained in 40 CFR 35.133. Specifically, in 40 CFR 35.133,
references are erroneously made to 40 CFR 35.100(b) rather than the
correct citation, 40 CFR 35.101(a).

II. Administrative Procedure Act

    The Administrative Procedure Act provides that matters relating to
agency grants are not subject to prior notice and opportunity for
comment, 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2). Therefore, EPA is issuing these technical
corrections as final rules.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule corrects a technical error and does not otherwise
change the requirements in the final rule. As a technical correction,
this action is not subject to the statutory and Executive Order review
requirements. For information about the statutory and Executive Order
review requirements as they related to the final rule, see Section III
in the Federal Register of June 16, 2009.

IV. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to the publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 35

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Grant programs--
environmental protection, Grant programs--Indians, Indians,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and Recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 31, 2009.
Mathy Stanislaus,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.

0
EPA amends 40 CFR Part 35 as follows:

PART 35--STATE AND LOCAL ASSISTANCE

Subpart A--[Amended]

0
1. The authority citation for part 35, subpart A continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 42
U.S.C. 300f et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.; 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.;
15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq.; Pub. L. 104-134,
110 Stat. 1321, 1321-299 (1996); Pub. L. 105-65, 111 Stat. 1344,
1373 (1997); 5. 105-276, 112 Stat. 2461, 2499 (1988).

0
2. Section 35.133 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:

Sec.  35.133  Programs eligible for inclusion.

    (a) Eligible programs. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this
section, the environmental programs eligible, in accordance with
appropriation acts, for inclusion in a Performance Partnership Grant
are listed in Sec.  35.101(a)(2) through (17) and (20). (Funds
available from the section 205(g) State Administration Grants program
(Sec.  35.101(a)(18)) and the Water Quality Management Planning Grant
program (Sec.  35.101(a)(19)) and funds awarded to States under State
Response Program Grants (Sec.  35.101(a)(20)) to capitalize a revolving
loan fund for Brownfield remediation or purchase insurance or develop a
risk sharing pool, an indemnity pool, or insurance mechanism to provide
financing for response actions may not be included in Performance
Partnership Grants.)
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-21549 Filed 9-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 32 (Wednesday, February 16, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9008-9009]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3454]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

February 3, 2011.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1756-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.204: Pivotal Negotiated Rate Agreement and Amendment to be
effective 12/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 02/02/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110202-5045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 14, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1757-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: Alliance Pipeline L.P. submits tariff filing per
154.204: Fortuna

assignment to Husky to be effective 1/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 02/02/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110202-5047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 14, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1758-000.
    Applicants: Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C.
    Description: Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C. submits tariff filing
per 154.204: Negotiated Rate--NJR Contract 890052 to be effective 2/1/
2011.
    Filed Date: 02/02/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110202-5061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 14, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1759-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC.
    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC submits a
request for a waiver of the Commission's capacity release regulations
to allow a transaction to occur.
    Filed Date: 02/02/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110202-5103.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 14, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1760-000.
    Applicants: Kern River Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Kern River Gas Transmission Company submits tariff
filing per 154.204: 2011 Pooling, Poso Creek to be effective 3/8/2011.
    Filed Date: 02/03/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110203-5036.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 15, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: CP11-76-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation
    Description: Application for Blanket Certificate Pursuant to 18 CFR
284.224 and Request for Shortened Comment Period of NorthWestern
Corporation.
    Filed Date: 02/01/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110201-5198.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 15, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-3454 Filed 2-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P