[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 112 (Friday, June 10, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35385-35386]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12452]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0332; Airspace Docket No. 22-AEA-4]
RIN 2120-AA66

Revocation of Class E Airspace; East Stroudsburg, PA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action removes Class E airspace in East Stroudsburg, PA,
as Stroudsburg-Pocono Airport has been abandoned and controlled
airspace is no longer required. This action enhances the safety and
management of controlled airspace within the national airspace system.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, September 8, 2022. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact

the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106,
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it removes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Stroudsburg-Pocono Airport, East Stroudsburg, PA, due to the
closing of the airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (87 FR 20793, April 8, 2022) for Docket No. FAA-2022-0332 to
remove Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Stroudsburg-Pocono Airport, East Stroudsburg, PA.
    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic routes, and reporting
points.

The Rule

    The FAA is amending 14 CFR part 71 by removing Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Stroudsburg-Pocono
Airport, East Stroudsburg, PA, as the airport has closed. Therefore,
the airspace is no longer necessary. This action enhances the safety
and management of controlled airspace within the national airspace
system.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only
affects air traffic procedures an air navigation, it is certified that
this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11F,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and
effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AEA PA E5 East Stroudsburg, PA [Removed]

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on June 6, 2022.
Lisa Burrows,
Manager, Airspace & Procedures Team North, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2022-12452 Filed 6-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75442-75445]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29574]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Emergency Order No. 29, Notice No. 1]

Emergency Order Under 49 U.S.C. 20104 Establishing Requirements
for Controlling Passenger Train Speeds and Staffing Locomotive Cabs at
Certain Locations on the Metro-North Commuter Railroad Company

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this emergency order (EO or Order) to require
that the New York State Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Metro-
North Commuter Railroad Company (Metro-North) take certain actions to
control passenger train speed at any location on main track where there
is a reduction of more than 20 miles per hour (mph) in the maximum
authorized passenger train speed. Under the EO, Metro-North must create
and comply with an FRA-approved action plan that institutes
modifications to its existing Automatic Train Control System or other
signal systems. Until Metro-North completes the necessary
modifications, the EO requires that two qualified railroad employees be
present in the control compartment of Metro-North's passenger trains
when those trains operate over locations on main track where there is a
required reduction of more than 20-mph in the maximum authorized
passenger train speed.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Herrmann, Acting Director,
Office of Safety Assurance and Compliance, Office of Railroad Safety,
FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202)
493-6036; Joseph St. Peter, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel,
FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202)
493-6047<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Stephen Gordon, Trial Attorney,
Office of Chief Counsel, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introduction

    FRA has determined that public safety compels issuance of this EO.
This determination is made in light of the Metro-North train derailment
that occurred in New York on December 1, 2013, which killed four people
and injured over 60 others. The preliminary investigation into this
derailment indicates that the subject train was traveling approximately
82 mph as it entered a sharp curve where the maximum authorized
passenger train speed was 30 mph. This is a serious overspeed event,
and when considered in the context of three other accidents that
occurred on Metro-North earlier this year, FRA has significant concerns
with regard to the railroad's compliance with Federal railroad safety
regulations and the railroad's own operating rules. These factors lead
FRA to the conclusion that additional action is necessary in the form
of this EO to eliminate an emergency situation

involving a hazard of death, personal injury, or significant harm to
the environment.

Authority

    Authority to enforce Federal railroad safety laws has been
delegated by the Secretary of Transportation to the Administrator of
FRA. 49 CFR 1.89. Railroads are subject to FRA's safety jurisdiction
under the Federal railroad safety laws. 49 U.S.C. 20101, 20103. FRA is
authorized to issue emergency orders where an unsafe condition or
practice ``causes an emergency situation involving a hazard of death,
personal injury, or significant harm to the environment.'' 49 U.S.C.
20104. These orders may immediately impose ``restrictions and
prohibitions . . . that may be necessary to abate the situation.'' Id.

Metro-North Spuyten Duyvil Derailment

    On Sunday, December 1, 2013, Metro-North passenger train 8808
(Train 8808) was traveling south from Poughkeepsie, New York, to Grand
Central Terminal in New York City. The train's crew included a
locomotive engineer, a conductor, and two assistant conductors. The
exact number of passengers aboard the train is not presently known. At
approximately 7:20 a.m., the train derailed as it approached the
Spuyten Duyvil Station in Spuyten Duyvil, Bronx, New York.\1\ The train
consisted of seven passenger coach cars, including a control cab
locomotive in the lead position, and a conventional locomotive at the
rear of the train, operating in a push-pull configuration (a control
cab locomotive is both a passenger car, in that it has seats for
passengers, and a locomotive, in that it has a control cab from which
the engineer can operate the train). All seven cars and the trailing
locomotive derailed. As of December 6, the derailment has resulted in
four fatalities and over 60 reported injuries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The train was not scheduled to stop at the Spuyten Duyvil
Station.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As is customary, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
has taken the lead role in conducting the investigation of this
accident pursuant to its legal authority. 49 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.; 49
CFR 800.3(a), 831.2(b). FRA is also investigating the accident. As
Train 8808 approached the Spuyten Duyvil Station from the north, it
traveled over a straightaway with a maximum authorized passenger train
speed of 70 mph before reaching a sharp curve in the track where, by
the railroad's own rules, the maximum authorized speed was reduced to
30 mph. A preliminary review of the information on the locomotive event
recorders by NTSB indicates that the train was traveling approximately
82 mph as it entered the curve's 30-mph speed restriction, exceeding
the maximum authorized speed on the straightaway by 12 mph, while also
traveling nearly three times the railroad's maximum authorized speed
for the curve.\2\ Additionally, NTSB indicates that information
obtained from the train's event recorders reveals that approximately
six seconds before the locomotive came to a stop, the locomotive
throttle was placed in idle and an application of the train's brake
system was made. Prior to the derailment, Train 8808 received a pre-
trip brake inspection and made nine stops. The NTSB reviewed the brake
inspection records for December 1 and, to date, has found no anomalies
with the train's brake system. Further, to date, no evidence has been
discovered that any track-related or signal-related deficiencies
contributed to the derailment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ FRA regulations provide, in part, that it is unlawful to
``[o]perate a train or locomotive at a speed which exceeds the
maximum authorized limit by at least 10 miles per hour.'' 49 CFR
240.305(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Safety Concerns Arising Out of 2013 Metro-North Incidents

    In addition to the December 1, 2013, accident discussed above,
three other notable accidents occurred on Metro-North earlier this
year. Two of the accidents occurred in May, and NTSB and FRA continue
to investigate these accidents, and NTSB recently held a public hearing
on both accidents in November 2013.\3\ A third accident that occurred
in July 2013 is also under investigation by NTSB and FRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See NTSB Dockets DCA-13-MR-003 and DCA-13-MR-003; available
online at http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/dms.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 17--Bridgeport, Connecticut Derailment

    The first accident occurred on May 17, 2013, in Bridgeport,
Connecticut, on Metro-North's New Haven line.\4\ An eastbound Metro-
North passenger train was traveling 74 mph on track number 4 when it
derailed near milepost 53.3 and came to rest in the foul of an adjacent
track. According to information obtained from locomotive event
recorders, about 20 seconds later a westbound Metro-North passenger
train on that adjacent track then struck the derailed train. As a
result of the accident, over 50 people were transported to hospitals,
and several million dollars in property damage occurred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See NTSB Preliminary Report, Accident Number DCA-13-MR-003
(June 4, 2013); available online at: http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/2013/bridgeport_ct/Bridgeport_CT_10_day_Preliminary_Report06042013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the accident scene, broken compromise joint bars were found. The
location where the accident had occurred was last inspected on May 15,
2013, two days prior to the accident. Metro-North's record of that
inspection noted that near milepost 53.3 on track number 4 an insulated
rail joint had inadequate supporting ballast and displayed indications
of vertical movement of the track system under load. In April 2013, the
joint bars at this location were found to have been broken and were
replaced by Metro-North.\5\ This accident was one of two that was the
subject of FRA's Safety Advisory 2013-05, regarding joint failures on
continuous welded rail track. 78 FR 47486 (Aug. 5, 2013). Safety
Advisory 2013-05 made several recommendations to railroads regarding
the special attention and maintenance that rail joints in continuous
welded rail require, including reminding railroads of applicable
Federal Track Safety Standards for such joints at 49 CFR 213.119, and
the importance of proper maintenance practices to ensure that joints
are adequately supported to support train loads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See NTSB Accident Reconstruction Animation, Derailment and
Collision of Metro-North Railroad Passenger Trains 1548 and 1581;
available online at: http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/2013/bridgeport_ct_hearing/animation.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 28--West Haven, Connecticut Employee Fatality

    A second accident occurred on May 28, 2013, when a Metro-North
passenger train in West Haven, Connecticut was traveling 70 mph when it
struck and killed a Metro-North maintenance-of-way employee who was
part of a roadway work group conducting a railroad maintenance and
construction project. According to NTSB's preliminary investigation,
the roadway work group had established exclusive track occupancy
working limits, in accordance with 49 CFR 214.321, on a controlled main
track in order to conduct their work.\6\ A Metro-North rail traffic
controller (RTC) trainee who was training under the mentorship of a
qualified RTC placed blocking devices on the computer console for the
signal system to prevent trains from entering the roadway work group's
exclusive track occupancy working limits. Later, the Metro-North RTC
trainee apparently

removed the blocking devices without notifying the roadway work
group.\7\ After the blocking devices were removed, a train then entered
the exclusive track occupancy working limits at 70 mph and struck and
killed the maintenance-of-way employee. Under FRA's applicable
regulations, train movements through exclusive track occupancy working
limits may only be made under the direction of the roadway worker in
charge of the working limits, and such movements are required to be
made at restricted speed, unless a higher speed has been specifically
authorized by the roadway worker in charge. 49 CFR 214.321(d). Further,
FRA's regulations prohibit the release of working limits until all
affected roadway workers have been notified of such release, and until
all affected roadway workers have either left the track or have been
afforded on-track safety through train approach warning.\8\ 49 CFR
214.329(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See NTSB Recommendation R-13-17 (June 17, 2013); available
online at http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2013/R-13-17.pdf.
    \7\ Id.
    \8\ The applicable FRA regulation governing train approach
warning requires that warning must be given to enable an affected
roadway worker to occupy a place of safety not less than 15 seconds
before a train moving at maximum authorized speed can pass the
roadway worker's location. 49 CFR 214.329(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NTSB has also stated that in an unrelated incident,
approximately three weeks prior to the May 28 accident in West Haven,
blocking devices that were protecting an occupied track were similarly
removed in error by a Metro-North RTC.\9\ In response, Metro-North
adopted additional procedures to prevent blocking devices from being
removed in error. Despite the adoption of these additional procedures,
the accident occurred in West Haven on May 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ NTSB Recommendation R-13-17 (June 17, 2013); available
online at http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2013/R-13-17.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

July 18--CSX Transportation, Inc., Freight Train Derailment

    A third accident occurred on July 18, 2013, when a CSX
Transportation, Inc. freight train derailed while traveling over Metro-
North's system. Ten of the train's cars derailed near the Spuyten
Duyvil station, and blocked tracks on Metro-North's Hudson line. No
persons were injured as a result of this accident, and the NTSB is
investigating to determine the accident's probable cause.
    The May 17 and May 28 accidents are still under investigation, and
the NTSB has not established their probable causes, and the July 18 CSX
accident also remains under investigation by FRA. However, together
with the December 1, 2013, accident discussed above, these accidents
lead FRA to believe that a potential lack of compliance with Federal
railroad safety regulations and applicable Metro-North operating rules
and procedures in recent months may have caused or contributed to these
serious accidents, which have resulted in five deaths and well over 100
injuries to Metro-North's passengers and employees since May. While the
specific causes of these recent accidents may vary, these events are
extremely concerning, and require immediate corrective actions.

Overspeed Protections

    Metro-North passenger trains are normally operated with only one
crewmember, a locomotive engineer, located in the cab of the passenger
train's locomotive. In the case of push-pull operations, this
crewmember occupies the control compartment of the passenger car (cab
car) at the leading end of a train. Metro-North's conventional
controlling locomotives are typically equipped with an alerter in order
to help ensure the attentiveness of the locomotive engineer operating
the train, while the control cab of passenger cars are typically
equipped with either an alerter or a ``dead man pedal'' for the same
purpose. Metro-North's locomotive controls and its signal systems also
incorporate an Automatic Train Control System (ATC system), which is a
train speed control system where trains may be automatically slowed or
stopped if a locomotive engineer fails to comply with a signal
indication.
    However, at locations where there are large reductions in the
maximum authorized speed that a passenger train may travel (e.g., at
locations such as the sharp curve in the track where the December 1
derailment occurred) and the signal system is not implicated, Metro-
North's ATC system is not currently coded to slow trains to comply with
applicable speed limits. If a locomotive engineer fails to take action
in accordance with applicable railroad rules to slow a train when
approaching such a speed limit, Metro-North's ATC system will not slow
the train to comply with the speed reduction. As a result, extreme
overspeed events like the December 1 derailment can occur if the lone
crewmember controlling the train fails to comply with railroad rules,
and, as demonstrated, these overspeed events can have catastrophic
results.
    In light of the December 1 derailment that is the subject of this
Order, and the other serious accidents that have occurred on Metro-
North in 2013, and in an effort to immediately prevent similar
incidents from occurring that could result in an emergency situation
involving a hazard of death, personal injury, or significant harm to
the environment, in this Order FRA is requiring that at main track
locations where reductions in maximum authorized passenger train speed
of greater than 20 mph occur, that Metro-North must immediately have an
additional qualified employee in each train's control compartment when
a train traverses each such location. A qualified employee is an
individual who is qualified on the physical characteristics of the
territory over which the train is operating, who is qualified on the
signal systems on the territory, and who has been trained to apply the
emergency brake if necessary to stop a train (e.g., a conductor, an
additional locomotive engineer, or a Metro-North transportation
supervisor). A qualified crewmember assigned to the train may serve as
the additional qualified employee in a train's control compartment when
a train traverses such locations. On trains where the control cab
locomotive configuration does not permit a second qualified person to
occupy the control compartment, the additional qualified person shall
occupy the space immediately adjacent to the control compartment and
maintain constant communication with the train's locomotive engineer.
The additional qualified employee must be in (or adjacent to, where
necessary) the control compartment well in advance of reaching the
location where the speed reduction occurs in order to provide
sufficient time to take action to control train speeds if necessary.
    FRA is requiring this action as the December 1 accident
demonstrates that Metro-North's existing ATC system and other existing
overspeed protections are not sufficient to prevent dangerous overspeed
events. The additional qualified employee located in the control
compartment of Metro-North's passenger trains can take immediate
actions to slow or stop passenger trains where necessary when the
train's locomotive engineer or the existing ATC system fails to do so.
    Metro-North must comply with this provision of the EO until it has
developed and complied with an action plan to make appropriate
modifications to its existing ATC system or other signal systems to
enable warning and enforcement of relevant passenger train speed
restrictions. FRA notes that other railroads have coded their ATC
systems to prevent overspeed events from occurring at locations where
civil or other speed restrictions occur. FRA is ordering Metro-North to
take similar steps to prevent accidents similar to the

December 1 accident from occurring in the future if a locomotive
engineer fails to take actions to appropriately slow or stop a
passenger train.

Finding and Order

    FRA recognizes that passenger rail transportation is generally
extremely safe. However, FRA finds that the recent December 1, 2013,
accident on Metro-North and the lack of overspeed protections in place
on Metro-North's system create an emergency situation involving a
hazard of death, personal injury, or significant harm to the
environment. Accordingly, pursuant to the authority of 49 U.S.C. 20104,
delegated to the FRA Administrator by the Secretary of Transportation,
49 CFR 1.89, it is hereby ordered:
    1. Metro-North shall survey its entire system and identify each
main track location where there is a reduction of more than 20 mph from
the maximum authorized operating speed for passenger trains (identified
locations), and provide a list of each location to the FRA Associate
Administrator for Railroad Safety/Chief Safety Officer (Associate
Administrator) by December 10, 2013.
    2. Metro-North shall develop an action plan that accomplishes each
of the following:
    a. Identifies appropriate modifications to Metro-North's existing
ATC system or other signal systems to enable warning and enforcement of
passenger train speeds at the identified locations.
    b. Contains milestones and target dates for implementing each
identified modification to Metro-North's existing ATC system or other
signal systems to enable warning and enforcement of passenger train
speeds at the identified locations.
    3. The action plan must be submitted to the Associate Administrator
not later than December 31, 2013. FRA will review and approve, approve
with conditions, or disapprove Metro-North's action plan within 30 days
of the plan's submission to FRA.
    4. Once FRA approves its action plan, Metro-North must make all
identified modifications to the existing ATC system or other signal
systems in the timeframes and manner that comply with all conditions
that FRA places on its approval of Metro-North's action plan.
    5. As soon as possible, but not later than December 10, 2013, all
passenger train movements at the identified locations shall be made
with at least two qualified persons in the cab of the train's
controlling locomotive \10\ until all modifications to Metro-North's
existing ATC system or other signal systems have been completed to
enable warning and enforcement of passenger train speed. On trains
where the control cab locomotive configuration does not permit a second
qualified person to occupy the control compartment, the additional
qualified person shall occupy the space immediately adjacent to the
control compartment and maintain constant communication with the
train's locomotive engineer. The additional qualified employee must be
present well in advance of reaching each identified location in order
to take action to control train speed if necessary. For purposes of
this requirement, ``qualified'' means that that an employee is
qualified on the physical characteristics of the territory, is
qualified on the signal systems of the territory, and has been trained
to apply the train's emergency brake to stop or slow the train as
necessary to comply with relevant railroad operating rules or
applicable Federal railroad safety regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Whether the cab of a conventional locomotive or control
compartment of a control cab locomotive when the train is being
operated in a push-pull configuration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nothing in this Order precludes FRA from using any of the other
enforcement tools available to the agency under its regulatory
authority to address non-compliance with the Federal railroad safety
laws and regulations by Metro-North. FRA is planning to conduct an
extensive investigation of Metro-North's safety compliance. If
necessary, FRA may issue additional emergency orders or compliance
orders, impose civil penalties against Metro-North (individuals may be
liable for civil penalties for willful violations of the Federal
railroad safety laws and regulations), or disqualify individuals from
performing safety-sensitive functions. In addition, FRA reemphasizes
the discussion in the agency's December 3, 2013, letter to the New York
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, directing Metro-North to update
FRA on the progress of the pending safety stand-down that will be
conducted by the railroad, and also to immediately implement a
confidential close call reporting system.

Relief

    Metro-North may petition for special approval to take actions not
in accordance with this EO. Such petitions shall be submitted to the
Associate Administrator, who shall be authorized to dispose of those
requests without the necessity of amending this EO. In reviewing any
petition for special review, the Associate Administrator shall grant
petitions only in which Metro-North has clearly articulated an
alternative action that will provide, in the Associate Administrator's
judgment, at least a level of safety equivalent to that provided by
compliance with this EO.

Penalties

    Any violation of this EO shall subject the person committing the
violation to a civil penalty of up to $105,000. 49 U.S.C. 21301. Any
individual who willfully violates a prohibition stated in this order is
subject to civil penalties under 49 U.S.C. 21301. In addition, such an
individual whose violation of this order demonstrates the individual's
unfitness for safety-sensitive service may be removed from safety-
sensitive service on the railroad under 49 U.S.C. 20111. If
appropriate, FRA may pursue criminal penalties under 49 U.S.C. 522(a)
and 49 U.S.C. 21311(a), as well as 18 U.S.C. 1001, for the knowing and
willful falsification of a report required by this order. FRA may,
through the Attorney General, also seek injunctive relief to enforce
this order. 49 U.S.C. 20112.

Effective Date and Notice to Affected Persons

    This EO is effective upon receipt of an electronic copy of it by
Metro-North, and Metro-North shall immediately initiate steps to
implement this Order in order to comply with the Order's deadlines.
Metro-North must complete and submit its action plan to FRA no later
than December 31, 2013. Notice of this EO will be given by providing
Metro-North with a copy of the Order, and by publishing it in the
Federal Register.

Review

    Opportunity for formal review of this EO will be provided in
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 20104(b) and 5 U.S.C. 554. Administrative
procedures governing such review are found at 49 CFR part 211. See 49
CFR 211.47, 211.71, 211.73, 211.75, and 211.77.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 6, 2013.
Joseph C. Szabo,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-29574 Filed 12-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: June 16, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 115)]
[Notices]
[Page 34200-34201]
[DOCID:fr16jn10-117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number: FRA-2010-0083]

Notice of Application for Approval of Discontinuance or
Modification of a Railroad Signal System

    Pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 235 and
49 U.S.C. 20502(a), the following railroad has petitioned the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA) seeking approval

for the discontinuance or modification of the signal system, as
detailed below.
    Docket Number: FRA-2010-0083.
    Applicant: Pan Am Railways, Mr. Timothy R. Kunzler, Chief Engineer,
C&S, Iron Horse Park, North Billerica, MA 01862.
    Approval is requested for the discontinuance of an interlocking on
the Freight Main Line (FML) of Pan Am Southern, LLC. (PAS). The
applicant's corporate name is Springfield Terminal Railway Company
(ST). ST is the operator of the railroad line for PAS, owner. PAS is a
joint venture between the Boston and Maine Corporation (B&M) and the
Norfolk Southern Railway Company. ST and B&M are wholly owned
subsidiaries of Pan Am Railways, Inc. (PAR).
    ST seeks approval of the discontinuance and removal of CPF-389 at
mileage 388.82. CPF-389 is located within the city of Deerfield,
Massachusetts, on FML of PAS. The closest station on the line is at
Greenfield, Massachusetts, mileage 385.36. The territory is the
responsibility of PAS General Manager and is under the direct control
of the Dispatching District Four Train Operations Manager located at
ST's North Billerica, Massachusetts, Operations Center. The
modification consist of the discontinuance and removal of CPF-389, all
associated appliances, and the installation of an automatic block
signal at mile 391.20.
    The reason given for the proposed change is that the second main
track was removed from service in the early 1990's. The power switch
and connection to this second main track were physically removed.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
2010-0083) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above
facility. All documents in the public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket facility's Web
site at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the
document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in
the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477) or at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 10, 2010.
Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2010-14481 Filed 6-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


August 16, 2010
MEMORANDUM
TO: EPA Docket #
FROM: Cheryl Caffrey, Mechanical Engineer, ASD, EPA
RE: Oregon.gov list of non-ethanol blend fuel suppliers
____________________________________________________________________________
http: The Oregon state government has published a list of non-ethanol fuel suppliers and it can be found at the following website:
 http://www.oregon.gov/OSMB/news/docs/EthanolList.pdf//www.oregon.gov/OSMB/news/docs/EthanolList.pdfhttp://www.oregon.gov/OSMB/news/docs/EthanolList.pdfhttp://www.
The following list is a sampling of the information provided to consumers. ews/docs/EthanolLihttp://www.oregoAugustn.gov/OSMB/news/docs/EthanolList.pdfhttp://www.oregon.gov/OSMB/news/docs/EthanolList.pdfLocation County Distributor / Retailer
Black Distributing Inc. Baker Distributor non-blended
2150 Broadway
Baker City, OR 97814
541.523.4575

Stage Stop Baker Retailer non-blended/diesel
120 Sumpter Hwy
Sumpter, OR 97877
541.894.2304

Triangle Farm Supply Inc. Baker Wholesaler / Distributor
2500 Cedar St.
Baker City, OR 97814
541.523.3336

Fischer Mill Supply Inc. Clackamas Wholesaler / Distributor
20990 S. Fischer Mill Rd.
Oregon City, OR 97045
503-631-3411

Wilco Farm Stores Clackamas Wholesaler / Distributor
19224 S. Molalla Ave. Non-blended premium
Oregon City, OR 97045 *sells packaged 5 gal. containers
503-656-0616

Wilco Farm Stores Clackamas Wholesaler / Distributor
195 East Hazeldell Way Non-blended premium
Canby, OR 97013 *sells packaged 5 gal. containers
503.266.2213


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on July 21, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2003-15479

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  The Fair Inc.						Date Filed:  June 20, 2003, as
supplemented

Relief requested:

Exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to engage in scheduled foreign air
transportation of persons, property and mail between any point or points
in Japan and any point or points in the United States in connection with
a code-share arrangement with United Airlines, Inc. (United).

Statement of authorization under 14 CFR Part 212 to display the
designator code of United (UA*) on flights operated by The Fair between
points in Japan (limited to the carriage of United’s U.S.-Japan
traffic), using small aircraft.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority

Applicant representative:  Charles J. Simpson, Jr. and Shannon M. Moyer
(202) 298-8660

DOT Analyst:  Gordon H. Bingham<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None filed

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved							Action date:  July 21, 2003

Effective dates of the exemption authority granted:  July 21, 2003-July
21, 2004

The statement of authorization granted was effective when taken July 21,
2003 and will remain in effect indefinitely, subject to the conditions
listed below.

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  1998 Memorandum
of Understanding between the United States and Japan (1998 MOU)

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

X  Standard exemption conditions attached and the 1998 MOU

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:  Based on the
record in this case, we found that The Fair is financially and
operationally qualified to perform the services authorized above.  We
found that The Fair is

2

substantially owned and effectively controlled by citizens of Japan.
The Fair is properly licensed by the Government

of Japan to perform the proposed services.

The code-share operations authorized here are subject to the following
conditions:

(a)  The authority granted above is limited to the carriage of
code-share traffic only.

(b)  The statement of authorization will remain in effect only as long
as (i) The Fair and/or United continue to hold the necessary underlying
authority to operate the code-share services at issue, and (ii) the
code-share agreement providing for the code-share operations remains in
effect.

(c)  The Fair and/or United must promptly notify the Department if the
code-share agreement providing for the code-share operations is no
longer effective or the carriers decide to cease operating any or all of
the approved code-share services.  Such notices should be filed in
Docket OST-2003-15479.

(d)  The Fair and/or United must notify the Department no later than 30
days before they begin any new code-share service under the code-share
services authorized here.  Such notice shall identify the market(s) to
be served and the date on which the service will begin.  Such notices
should be filed in Docket OST-2003-15479.

(e)  The code-sharing operations conducted under this authority must
comply with 14 CFR Part 257 and with any amendments to the
Department’s regulations concerning code-share arrangements that may
be adopted.  Notwithstanding any provisions in the contract between the
carriers, our approval here is expressly conditioned upon the
requirements that the subject foreign air transportation be sold in the
name of the carrier holding out such service in computer reservation
systems and elsewhere; that the carrier selling such transportation
(i.e., the carrier shown on the ticket) accept responsibility for the
entirety of the code-share journey for all obligations established in
its contract of carriage with the passenger; and that the passenger
liability of the operating carrier be unaffected.  Further, the
operating carrier shall not permit the code of its U.S. carrier
code-sharing partner to be carried on any flight that enters, departs or
transits the airspace of any area for whose airspace the Federal
Aviation Administration has issued a flight prohibition.

(f)  The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that
neither carrier shall give any force or effect to any contractual
provisions between themselves that are contrary to these conditions.

(g)  In the conduct of the code-share operations authorized, the holder
shall use only small aircraft (i.e., aircraft designed to have a maximum
passenger capacity of not more than 60 seats or a maximum payload
capacity of not more than 18,000 pounds).

(h)  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted at any time
without hearing at our discretion.

Action taken by:  Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) the applicant was qualified to perform the
proposed operations; (2) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

Attachment

Foreign Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security;1

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: (a) based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or (b)  based
on a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term "international air transportation" means "international
transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

____________________________

1 To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder should, before commencing any new
service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that would be
the holder’s last point of departure for the United States, contact
its Principal Security Inspector (PSI) to advise the PSI of its plans
and to find out whether the Transportation Security Administration has
determined that security is adequate to allow such airport(s) to be
served.

  By letter dated June 24, 2003, The Fair notified the Department that
because it will not operate any aircraft designed to have a maximum
capacity of more than 60 passengers, it would not oppose our limiting
the authority requested to the operation of small aircraft only.

  The Fair will display United’s designator code (UA*) on The Fair
domestic Japanese flights that connect with United and All Nippon
Airways (ANA) code-share services between the United States and Japan.
In that regard, on August 7, 1998, we granted United and ANA, blanket
statements of authorization to engage in code-share services in the
U.S.-Japan market (undocketed).  Similarly, we have also granted
statements of authorization to ANA’s subsidiary companies (Air Nippon
Co., Ltd. and Air Japan Co., Ltd.) to permit them to display the UA*
designator code on Air Nippon and Air Japan flights.  See Dockets
OST-2002-13144 and OST-2002-13473, respectively.

  The Fair holds an Air Operator Certificate (AOC) issued by Japan’s
Ministry of Transport on June 20, 2000, authorizing The Fair to conduct
scheduled air transport services within Japan using Bombardier CL-600
aircraft.

  We expect this notification to be received within 10 days of such
non-effectiveness or of such decision.