[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 162 (Friday, August 21, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50846-50847]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20744]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC15-12-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-725); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
currently approved information collection, FERC-725 [Certification of
Electric Reliability Organization; Procedures for Electric Reliability
Standards].

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due October 20,
2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC15-12-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-725, Certification of Electric Reliability
Organization; Procedures for Electric Reliability Standards
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0225
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-725 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: The FERC-725 information collection contains the
following information collection elements:
     Self Assessment and Electric Reliability Organization
(ERO) Application: The Commission requires the ERO to submit to FERC a
performance assessment report every five years. The next assessment is
due in 2019. Each Regional Entity submits a performance assessment
report to the ERO. Submitting an application to become an ERO is also
part of this collection.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission does not expect any new ERO applications to
be submitted in the next five years and is not including any burden
for this requirement in the burden estimate. FERC still seeks to
renew the regulations pertaining to a new ERO application under this
renewal but is expecting the burden to be zero for the foreseeable
future. 18 CFR 39.3 contains the regulation pertaining to ERO
applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Reliability Assessments: 18 CFR 39.11 requires the ERO to
assess the reliability and adequacy of the Bulk-Power System in North
America. Subsequently, the ERO must report to the Commission on its
findings. Regional entities perform similar assessments within
individual regions. Currently, the ERO submits to FERC three
assessments each year: long term, winter, and summer. In addition, NERC
also submits various other assessments as needed.
     Reliability Standards Development: Under Section 215 of
the Federal Power Act (FPA), the ERO is charged with developing
Reliability Standards. Regional Entities may also develop regional
specific standards. Reliability Standards are one of the three
principal mechanisms provided to FERC to ensure reliability on the
Bulk-Power System.
     Reliability Compliance: Reliability Standards are
mandatory and enforceable upon approval by FERC. In addition to the
specific information collection requirements contained in each
Reliability Standard (cleared under other information collections),
there are general compliance, monitoring and enforcement information
collection requirements imposed on applicable entities. Audits, spot
checks, self-certifications, exception data submittals, violation
reporting, and mitigation plan confirmation are included in this area.
     Stakeholder Survey: The ERO uses a stakeholder survey to
solicit feedback from registered entities \2\ in preparation for its
three year and five year self-performance assessment. The Commission
assumes that the ERO will perform another survey prior to the 2019
self- assessment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A ``registered entity'' is an entity that is registered with
the ERO. All Bulk-Power System owners, operators and users are
required to register with the ERO. Registration is the basis for
determining the Reliability Standards with which an entity must
comply. See http://www.nerc.com/page.php?cid=3%7C25 for more
details.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Other Reporting: This category refers to all other
reporting requirements imposed on the ERO or regional entities in order
to comply with the Commission's regulations. For example, FERC may
require NERC to submit a special reliability assessment. This category
is mentioned to capture these types of one-time filings required of
NERC or the Regions.
    The Commission implements its responsibilities through 18 CFR part
39. Without the FERC-725 information, the Commission, ERO, and Regional
Entities will not have the data needed to determine whether sufficient
and appropriate measures are being taken to ensure the reliability of
the nation's electric grid.
    Type of Respondents: ERO and regional entities
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \3\ The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission defines burden as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,
retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.

                                    FERC-725--Certification of the ERO; Procedures for Electric Reliability Standards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average
                                       Type of reporting          Number of            Number of      Total number of   burden hours    Estimated total
         Type of respondent               requirement            respondents         responses per       responses       & cost per     annual burden  &
                                                                                respondent                          response            cost
                                     .....................  (A)..................         (B) \4\    (A) x (B) = (C)              (D)          (C) x (D)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric Reliability Organization    Self-Assessment......  .....................                .2                .2           7,800              1,560
 (ERO) \1\.                                                                                \5\ $574,704           $114,941
                                     Reliability            .....................               5.5               5.5          15,600             85,800
                                      Assessments.                                                                     \5\ $1,149,408         $6,321,744
                                     Reliability            .....................               2                 2            12,480             24,960
                                      Compliance.                                                                        \5\ $919,526         $1,839,053
                                     Standards Development  .....................               1                 1            28,080             28,080
                                                                                \6\ $1,865,916         $1,865,916
                                     Other Reporting......  1....................               1                 1              2080              2,080
                                                                                \7\ $270,130           $270,130
Regional Entities..................  Self-Assessment......  .....................                .2               1.6          16,640             26,624
                                                                                \6\ $1,105,728         $1,769,164
                                     Reliability            .....................               1                 8            15,600            124,800
                                      Assessments.                                                                     \6\ $1,036,620         $8,292,960
                                     Reliability            .....................               1                 8            40,560            324,480
                                      Compliance.                                                                      \5\ $2,988,461        $23,907,688
                                     Standards Development  .....................               1                 8             2,340             18,720
                                                                                \6\ $155,493         $1,243,944
                                     Other Reporting......  8....................               1                 8             1,040              8,320
                                                                                \7\ $135,065         $1,080,520
Registered Entities................  Stakeholder Survey...  .....................                .2             289                 8              2,312
                                                                                \5\ $589           $170,221
                                     Reliability            estimated 1446.......               1              1446               400            578,400
                                      Compliance.                                                                         \5\ $29,472        $42,616,512
                                    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ERO                                                                             N/A                                                     142,480 hrs.
    Regional                                                                                502,944 hrs.
    Registered                                                                                580,712 hrs.
                                    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total Cost.................  .....................  .....................  ................  ................  ..............        $89,492,791
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In all instances below where the number of responses per
respondent is ``1'' the Commission acknowledges that actual number
of responses varies and cannot be estimated clearly.
    \5\ Uses the weighted hourly average wage (salary plus benefits)
for electrical engineers and lawyers obtained from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics (data for May 2014, posted on 4/1/2015 at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm): $91.82/hour. The weighted
average used the following calculation: [(0.20) * ($129.87) + (0.60)
* ($66.45) + (0.2) * ($39.18)] = $73.68. $129.87/hour is the wage
for lawyers. $66.45/hour is the wage for engineers. $39.17/hour is
the wage for office and administrative support. Occupation codes are
23-0000, 17-2071, and 43-0000 respectively.
    \6\ Uses the hourly average wage (salary plus benefits) for
electrical engineers obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(data for May 2014, posted on 4/1/2015 at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm): $66.45/hour. Occupation code is 17-2071.
    \7\ Uses the hourly average wage (salary plus benefits) for
lawyers obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (data for May
2014, posted on 4/1/2015 at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm): $129.87/hour. Occupation code is 23-0000.

    Dated: August 17, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-20744 Filed 8-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


                          EPA/HQ Summary of Meeting             Northeast Waste Management Officials Association (NEWMOA)

Attendees

NEWMOA Participants: Terri Goldberg and representatives from CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, VT EPA/R1 Participants:

EPA/HQ Participants:

Beth Deabay, Liz McCarthy, Steve Yee, Robin Biscaia, Sharon Leitch

Jessica Young, Kathy Lett, Jim O'Leary, Drew Lausch, Kristin Fitzgerald, Josh Smeraldi, Mary Beth Sheridan

Date:  November 23, 2015

Location:  Conference Call

Summary

EPA HQ met with Terri Goldberg from NEWMOA, as well as representatives of 7 of the member states, to discuss the proposed Hazardous Waste Pharmaceuticals Rule.  As NEWMOA prepares to submit comments on the proposed rule, its members asked EPA to clarify provisions of the proposal and how they might affect the roles and responsibilities of the implementing states.        NEWMOA plans to submit comments to the docket for the pharmaceuticals proposed rule.


[Federal Register: July 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 138)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 35769-35772]
[DOCID:fr21jy09-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0646; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-055-AD;
Amendment 39-15974; AD 2009-15-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Aerospatiale Model SN-601 (Corvette)
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the

products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    During the landing roll a Corvette aircraft inclined to the Left
Hand (LH) side as a result of the uncoupling of the left main
landing gear shock absorber upper and lower cylinders, leading the
left wheel tire to rub against the left wing under surface and to
deflate, and the left wing tip fuel tank to strike the runway
surface.
    The investigation showed that this uncoupling resulted from the
loosening of the shock absorber locking system nut and its
associated lock washer.
* * * * *
The unsafe condition is reduced structural integrity of the main
landing gear, which could cause the wing tip fuel tank to strike the
runway surface and potentially result in a fire. This AD requires
actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in
the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective August 5, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of August 5,
2009.
    We must receive comments on this AD by August 20, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2125; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2009-0041, dated February 25, 2009 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    During the landing roll a Corvette aircraft inclined to the Left
Hand (LH) side as a result of the uncoupling of the left main
landing gear shock absorber upper and lower cylinders, leading the
left wheel tire to rub against the left wing under surface and to
deflate, and the left wing tip fuel tank to strike the runway
surface.
    The investigation showed that this uncoupling resulted from the
loosening of the shock absorber locking system nut and its
associated lock washer.
    This AD requires the inspection of the locking system of the
main landing gear shock absorber and the accomplishment of the
associated corrective actions.

The unsafe condition is reduced structural integrity of the main
landing gear, which could cause the wing tip fuel tank to strike the
runway surface and potentially result in a fire. Required actions
include doing a general visual inspection to verify the proper position
of the lock washer and the tightening torque of the nut of the shock
absorber locking system on both the left-hand and right-hand main
landing gear, and doing corrective actions including replacing the lock
washer, installing the main landing gear shock absorber body, and
installing the main landing gear shock absorber, as applicable. You may
obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Corvette Service Bulletin 32-19, dated January 9,
2009. The actions described in this service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.
    There are no products of this type currently registered in the
United States. However, this rule is necessary to ensure that the
described unsafe condition is addressed if any of these products are
placed on the U.S. Register in the future.

Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a Note within the AD.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    Since there are currently no domestic operators of this product,
notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are
unnecessary.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0646; Directorate
Identifier 2009-NM-055-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. 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.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2009-15-11 Aerospatiale: Amendment 39-15974. Docket No. FAA-2009-
0646; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-055-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective August
5, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Aerospatiale Model SN-601 (Corvette)
airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing
gear.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continued airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    During the landing roll a Corvette aircraft inclined to the Left
Hand (LH) side as a result of the uncoupling of the left main
landing gear shock absorber upper and lower cylinders, leading the
left wheel tire to rub against the left wing under surface and to
deflate, and the left wing tip fuel tank to strike the runway
surface.
    The investigation showed that this uncoupling resulted from the
loosening of the shock absorber locking system nut and its
associated lock washer.
    This AD requires the inspection of the locking system of the
main landing gear shock absorber and the accomplishment of the
associated corrective actions.

The unsafe condition is reduced structural integrity of the main
landing gear, which could cause the wing tip fuel tank to strike the
runway surface and potentially result in a fire. Required actions
include doing a general visual inspection to verify the proper
position of the lock washer and the tightening torque of the nut of
the shock absorber locking system on both the left-hand and right-
hand main landing gear, and doing corrective actions including
replacing the lock washer, installing the main landing gear shock
absorber body, and installing the main landing gear shock absorber,
as applicable.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, do a
general visual inspection to verify the proper position of the lock
washer (located opposite the nut notch) and check the tightening
torque of the nut of the shock absorber locking system on both the
left-hand and right-hand main landing gear, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Corvette Service Bulletin 32-
19, dated January 9, 2009.
    (2) In case of findings of improper assembly during the
inspection required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before further
flight, replace the lock washer, install the main landing gear shock
absorber body, and install the main landing gear shock absorber, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Corvette
Service Bulletin 32-19, dated January 9, 2009. Within 120 flight
cycles but not before 100 flight cycles, repeat the inspection
specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.
    (3) In case of no findings during the inspection required in
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, no further inspections are required.
    (4) After the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
main landing gear shock absorber on which the locking system (nut
and lock washer) is not compliant with the approved configuration as
identified by Airbus Corvette Service Bulletin 32-19, dated January
9, 2009.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service
information as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Dan
Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies,
notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal
avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal
inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office. The AMOC
approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Airworthiness
Directive 2009-0041, dated February 25, 2009; and Airbus Corvette
Service Bulletin 32-19, dated January 9, 2009; for related
information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Airbus Corvette Service Bulletin 32-19, dated
January 9, 2009, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the
AD specifies otherwise. (Only page 1 of this

document specifies the issue date of the document; no other page of
this document contains this information.)
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact ATR-
GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional, 1, All[eacute]e Pierre
Nadot, 31712 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 (0) 5 62 21 62 21;
fax +33 (0) 5 62 21 67 18; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.aerochain.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 2, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-16929 Filed 7-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 228 (Monday, November 28, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72997-73005]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30476]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2000-7257; Notice No. 68]

Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC); Working Group Activity
Update

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

ACTION: Announcement of Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC)
Working Group activities.

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

SUMMARY: The FRA is updating its announcement of RSAC's Working Group
activities to reflect its current status.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Woolverton, RSAC Designated
Federal Officer/Administrative Officer, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., Mailstop 25, Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Robert
Lauby, Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Mailstop 25, Washington,
DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice serves to update FRA's last
announcement of working group activities and status reports of December
7, 2010 (75 FR 76070). The 44th full RSAC meeting was held May 20,
2011, and the 45th meeting is scheduled for December 8, 2011, at the
National Association of Home Builders, National Housing Center, located
at 1201 15th Street NW., Washington, DC 20005.
    Since its first meeting in April of 1996, the RSAC has accepted 36
tasks. Status for each of the open tasks (neither completed nor
terminated) is provided below:

Open Tasks

    Task 96-4--Tourist and Historic Railroads. Reviewing the
appropriateness of the agency's current policy regarding the
applicability of existing and proposed regulations to tourist,
excursion, scenic, and historic railroads. This task was accepted on
April 2, 1996, and a working group was established. The working group
monitored the steam locomotive regulation task. Planned future
activities involve the review of other regulations for possible
adaptation to the safety needs of tourist and historic railroads.
Contact: Robert Lauby,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 03-01--Passenger Safety. This task includes updating and
enhancing the regulations pertaining to passenger safety, based on
research and experience. This task was accepted on May 20, 2003, and a
working group was established. Prior to embarking on substantive
discussions of a specific task, the working group set forth in writing
a specific description of the task. The working group reports planned
activity to the full RSAC at each scheduled full RSAC meeting,
including milestones for completion of projects and progress toward
completion. At the first meeting held on September 9-10, 2003, a
consolidated list of issues was completed. At the second meeting, held
on November 6-7, 2003, four task groups were established: Emergency
Preparedness, Mechanical, Crashworthiness, and Track/Vehicle
Interaction. The task forces met and reported on activities for working
group consideration at the third meeting, held on May 11-12, 2004, and
a fourth meeting was held October 26-27, 2004. The working group met on
March 21-22, 2006, and again on September 12-13, 2006, at which time
the group agreed to establish a task force on General Passenger Safety.
The full Passenger Safety Working Group met on

April 17-18, 2007; December 11-12, 2007; November 13, 2008; and June 8,
2009. On August 5, 2009, the working group was requested to establish
an Engineering Task Force (ETF) to consider technical criteria and
procedures for qualifying alternative passenger equipment designs as
equivalent in safety to equipment meeting the design standards in the
Passenger Equipment Safety Standards. The working group met last on
September 16, 2010, and no additional meetings are currently scheduled.
Contact: Charles Bielitz,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Engineering Task Force. The Passenger Safety Working Group approved
a request from FRA to establish an ETF under the Passenger Safety
Working Group in August 2009. The mission of the task force is to
produce a set of technical evaluation criteria and procedures for
passenger rail equipment built to alternative designs. The technical
evaluation criteria and procedures would provide a means of
establishing whether an alternative design would result in performance
at least equal to the structural design standards set forth in the
Passenger Equipment Safety Standards (Title 49 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part 238). The initial focus of this effort will be
on Tier I standards. When completed, the criteria and procedures would
form a technical basis for making determinations concerning equivalent
safety pursuant to 49 CFR Section 238.201, and provide a technical
framework for presenting evidence to FRA in support of any request for
waiver of the compressive (buff) strength requirement, as set forth in
49 CFR 238.203. See 49 CFR part 211, Rules of Practice. The criteria
and procedures could be incorporated into Part 238 at a later date
after notice and opportunity for public comment. The ETF was formed and
a kickoff meeting was held on September 23-24, 2009. The group held
follow-on meetings November 3-4, 2009; January 7-8, 2010; and March 9-
10, 2010. A followup GoTo/Webinar meeting was held on July 12, 2010.
The ETF developed a draft ``Criteria and Procedures Report,'' that was
approved by the Passenger Safety Working Group during the September 16,
2010, meeting and by the RSAC Committee during the September 23, 2010,
meeting. The document has been placed on the FRA Web site at the
following address: http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/RSAC_REPORT-%209-16-10.pdf.
    Engineering Task Force II. To build on the success of the ETF in
developing a set of alternative technical criteria and procedures for
evaluating the crashworthiness and occupant protection performance of
passenger rail equipment in service at conventional operating speeds,
the FRA requested that the Passenger Safety Working Group re-task the
group to concentrate on developing crashworthiness and occupant
protection safety recommendations for high-speed passenger trains. The
Passenger Safety Working Group accepted the task on July 28, 2010, by
electronic vote. Under the new task, the task force may address any
safety features of the equipment, including but not limited to
crashworthiness, interior occupant protection, glazing, emergency
egress, and fire safety features. Any type of equipment may be
addressed, including conventional locomotives, high-speed power cars,
cab cars, multiple-unit (MU) locomotives, and coach cars. The equipment
addressed may be used in any type of passenger service, from
conventional-speed to high-speed. Recommendations may take the form of
criteria and procedures, revisions to existing regulations, or adoption
of new regulations, including rules of particular applicability. The
work of the re-tasked ETF is intended to assist FRA in developing
appropriate safety standards for the high-speed rail projects planned
for California. The Engineering Task Force II held a kickoff meeting on
October 21-22, 2010, to begin work on the new high-speed task, and had
follow-on meetings on January 11-12, 2011, February 14-15 2011, March
30-31, 2011, and June 16-17, 2011. Consensus Tier III recommendations
of the ETF have been developed and were accepted by vote during a
scheduled meeting on October 6-7, 2011. The ETF II has formed two
additional Task Groups to work in the areas of track worthiness and
brakes. The Track worthiness Task Group is tasked to identify potential
safety issues related to operation of high-speed train sets on
conventional track and to make recommendations on how best to mitigate
any consequences. The Task Group includes experts and key stakeholders
such as international operators of high-speed equipment, car builders,
wheel/rail interaction dynamics specialists, and other RSAC working
group members involved in vehicle/track interaction. The Brakes Task
Group is tasked to review braking system requirements and international
braking system requirements verses existing U.S. requirements including
inspection and maintenance and identify common features, determine
basic parameters and consider use of service proven braking systems.
The Task Group will also consider performance based provisions/
requirements with consideration for operator's to develop maintenance,
inspection, and service plans and make recommendations regarding brakes
to the ETF II as related to Tier III. Contact: Robert Lauby, (202) 493-
6474.
    Emergency Preparedness Task Force. At the working group meeting on
March 9-10, 2005, the working group received and approved the consensus
report of the Emergency Preparedness Task Force related to emergency
communication, emergency egress, and rescue access. These
recommendations were presented to and approved by the full RSAC on May
18, 2005. The working group met on September 7-8, 2005, and additional,
supplementary recommendations were presented to and accepted by the
full RSAC on October 11, 2005. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
was published on August 24, 2006 (71 FR 50275), and was open for
comment until October 23, 2006. The working group agreed upon
recommendations for the final rule, including resolution of final
comments received, during the April 17-18, 2007, meeting. The
recommendations were presented to and approved by the full RSAC on June
26, 2007. The Passenger Train Emergency Systems final rule, focusing on
emergency communication, emergency egress, and rescue access, was
published on February 1, 2008 (73 FR 6370). The task force met on
October 17-18, 2007, and reached consensus on the draft rule text for a
followup NPRM on Passenger Train Emergency Systems, focusing on low
location emergency exit path marking, emergency lighting, and emergency
signage. The task force presented the draft rule text to the Passenger
Safety Working Group on December 11-12, 2007, and the consensus draft
rule text was presented to, and approved by full RSAC vote during the
February 20, 2008, meeting. During the May 13-14, 2008, meeting, the
task force recommended clarifying the applicability of back-up
emergency communication system requirements in the February 1, 2008,
final rule, and FRA announced its intention to exercise limited
enforcement discretion for a new provision amending instruction
requirements for emergency window exit removal. The working group
ratified these recommendations on June 19, 2008. The task force met
again on March 31, 2009, to clarify issues related to the followup NPRM
raised by members. The modified rule text was presented to and approved
by the Passenger Safety Working Group on June 8, 2009. The working
group requested that FRA draft

the rule text requiring daily inspection of removable panels or windows
in vestibule doors and entrust the Emergency Preparedness Task Force
with reviewing the text. FRA sent the draft text to the task force for
review and comment on August 4, 2009. The draft rule text was approved
by the Passenger Safety Working Group by mail ballot on December 23,
2009. The target timeframe for the NPRM publication has been pushed
back to November 2012 due to competing Rail Safety Improvement Act of
2008 (RSIA) priorities. No additional task force meetings are currently
scheduled. Contact: Brenda Moscoso,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Mechanical Task Force--Completed. Initial recommendations on
mechanical issues (revisions to 49 CFR Part 238) were approved by the
full RSAC on January 26, 2005. At the working group meeting of
September 7-8, 2005, the task force presented additional perfecting
amendments and the full RSAC approved them on October 11, 2005. An NPRM
was published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2005 (70 FR
73070). Public comments were due by February 17, 2006. The final rule
was published in the Federal Register on October 19, 2006 (71 FR
61835), effective December 18, 2006.
    Crashworthiness Task Force--Completed. Among its efforts, the
Crashworthiness Task Force provided consensus recommendations on
static-end strength that were adopted by the working group on September
7-8, 2005. The full RSAC accepted the recommendations on October 11,
2005. The front-end strength of cab cars and MU locomotives NPRM was
published in the Federal Register on August 1, 2007 (72 FR 42016), with
comments due by October 1, 2007. A number of comments were entered into
the docket, and a Crashworthiness Task Force meeting was held September
9, 2008, to resolve comments on the NPRM. Based on the consensus
language agreed to at the meeting, FRA has prepared the text of the
final rule incorporating the resolutions made at the task force meeting
and the final rule language was adopted at the Passenger Safety Working
Group meeting held on November 13, 2008. The language was presented and
approved at the December 10, 2008, full RSAC meeting. The final rule
was issued on December 31, 2009, and published on January 8, 2010 (75
FR 1180). Contact: Gary Fairbanks,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Vehicle/Track Interaction Task Force. The task force is developing
proposed revisions to 49 CFR Parts 213 and 238, principally regarding
high-speed passenger service. The task force met on October 9-11, 2007,
and again on November 19-20, 2007, in Washington, DC, and presented the
final task force report and final recommendations and proposed rule
text for approval by the Passenger Safety Working Group at the December
11-12, 2007, meeting. The final report and the proposed rule text were
approved by the working group and were presented to and approved by
full RSAC vote during the February 20, 2008, meeting. The group met on
February 27-28, 2008, and by teleconference on March 18, 2010, to
address unresolved issues, and the NPRM was published on May 10, 2010
(75 FR 25928). The task force was called back into session on August 5-
6, 2010, to review and consider NPRM comments. The final rule will
amend the Track Safety Standards and Passenger Equipment Safety
Standards for high-speed train operations and train operations at high
cant deficiencies to promote the safe interaction of rail vehicles with
the track over which they operate. It will revise both the safety
limits for these operations and the process to qualify them. It
accounts for a range of vehicle types that are currently used and may
likely be used on future high-speed or high cant deficiency rail
operations, and would provide safety assurance for train operations in
all classes of track. It is based on the results of simulation studies
designed to identify track geometry irregularities associated with
unsafe wheel forces and acceleration, thorough reviews of vehicle
qualification and revenue service test data, and consideration of
international practices. The draft final rule was sent to the task
force for final consensus on November 11, 2011. The target date set for
the final rule is April 2012. Contact: John Mardente,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    General Passenger Safety Task Force. At the Passenger Safety
Working Group meeting on April 17-18, 2007, the task force presented a
progress report to the working group. The task force met on July 18-19,
2007, and afterwards it reported proposed reporting cause codes for
injuries involving the platform gap, which were approved by the Working
Group by mail ballot in September 2007. The full RSAC approved the
recommendations for changes to 49 CFR Part 225 accident/incident cause
codes on October 25, 2007. The General Passenger Safety Task Force
presented draft guidance material for management of the gap that was
considered and approved by the Working Group during the December 11-12,
2007, meeting and was presented to and approved by full RSAC vote
during the February 20, 2008, meeting. The group met April 23-24, 2008,
December 3-4, 2008, April 21-23, 2009, October 7-8, 2009, and July 30,
2010 by GoTo/Webinar teleconference. The task force continues work on
passenger train door securement, ``second train in station,''
trespasser incidents, and System Safety-based solutions by developing a
regulatory approach to System Safety. The task force has created two
task groups to focus on these issues.
    The Door Safety Task Group has reached consensus on 47 out of 48
safety issues and had five items that have been remanded to the task
force for vote. The issues are addressed in the area of passenger train
door mechanical and operational requirements and presented draft
regulatory language to the Passenger Safety Working Group at the
September 16, 2010, meeting. More work remains to ensure the 49 CFR
Part 238 door rule consensus document and the proposed American Public
Transit Association (APTA) door standard (APTA SS-M-18-10) use uniform
language. The document was approved by the Passenger Safety Working
Group by electronic vote on March 31, 2011, and approved by the RSAC on
May 20, 2011. This rulemaking would amend the passenger equipment
safety standards to enhance safety standards as they relate to
passenger door securement while a passenger train is in service based
on research and experiences of FRA safety inspectors. Specifically, FRA
would incorporate by reference APTA standard: ``APTA SS-M-18-10
Standard for Powered Exterior Side Door System Design for New Passenger
Cars.'' A draft NPRM is currently under development with a target
publication date of May 2012. No additional Door Task Group meetings
are currently scheduled. Contact: Brian Hontz,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The System Safety Task Group has produced draft regulatory language
for a System Safety Rule, but further work on this rulemaking is
delayed until a study of legal protections for Risk Reduction Program
(RRP) and System Safety Program (SSP) risk analysis data that is
required by the RSIA is complete. The legal study is expected to be
complete by December 2012. The System Safety rulemaking would improve
passenger railroad safety through structured, proactive processes and
procedures developed by passenger railroad operators. It would require
passenger railroads to establish an SSP that would systematically
evaluate and manage risks in order to reduce the number and rates of
railroad accidents, incidents, injuries, and fatalities. The target
date

for NPRM publication is May 2012. No additional System Safety Task
Group meetings are currently scheduled. Contact: Dan Knote, (631) 567-
1596.
    Task 05-01--Review of Roadway Worker Protection Issues. This task
was accepted on January 26, 2005, to review 49 CFR part 214, Subpart C,
Roadway Worker Protection (RWP), and related sections of Subpart A; to
recommend consideration of specific actions to advance the on-track
safety of railroad employees and contractors engaged in maintenance-of-
way activities throughout the general system of railroad
transportation, including clarification of existing requirements. A
working group was established and reported to the RSAC any specific
actions identified as appropriate. The first meeting of the working
group was held on April 12-14, 2005. Over the course of 2 years, the
group drafted and reached consensus on regulatory language for various
revisions, clarifications, and additions to 32 separate items in 19
sections of the rule. However, two parties raised technical concerns
regarding one of those items, namely, the draft language concerning
electronic display of track authorities. The working group presented
and received approval on all of its consensus recommendations for draft
rule text to the full RSAC at the June 26, 2007, meeting. FRA will
address the electronic display of track authorities issue, along with
eight additional items that the working group was unable to reach
consensus, through the traditional NPRM process. In early 2008, the
external working group members were solicited to review the consensus
rule text for errata review. In order to address the heightened
concerns raised with the current regulations for adjacent-track, on-
track safety, FRA decided to issue, on an accelerated basis, a separate
NPRM that would focus on this element of the RWP rule alone. An NPRM
with an abbreviated comment period regarding adjacent-track, on-track
safety was published on July 17, 2008, but was later withdrawn on
August 13, 2008, to permit further consideration of the RSAC consensus
language. A second NPRM concerning adjacent-controlled-track, on-track
safety was published on November 25, 2009, and comments were due to the
docket by January 25, 2010. Comments have been reviewed and considered
by FRA, and the target publication date for the final rule is November
2011. Due to the ongoing work of this separate rulemaking, the
remaining larger NPRM relating to the various revisions,
clarifications, and additions to 31 separate items in 19 sections of
the rule, and FRA's recommendations for nine nonconsensus items is now
planned for early 2012. Contact: Joe Riley,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 05-02--Reduce Human Factor-Caused Train Accident/Incidents.
This task was accepted on May 18, 2005, to reduce the number of human
factor-caused train accidents/incidents and related employee injuries.
The Railroad Operating Rules Working Group was formed, and the working
group extensively reviewed the issues presented. The final working
group meeting devoted to developing a proposed rule was held February
8-9, 2006. The working group was not able to deliver a consensus
regulatory proposal, but it did recommend that it be used to review
comments on FRA's NPRM, which was published in the Federal Register on
October 12, 2006 (FR 71 60372), with public comments due by December
11, 2006. Two reviews were held, one on February 8-9, 2007, and one on
April 4-5, 2007. Consensus was reached on four items and those items
were presented and accepted by the full RSAC at the June 26, 2007,
meeting. A final rule was published in the Federal Register on February
13, 2008 (73 FR 8442), with an effective date of April 14, 2008. FRA
received four petitions for reconsideration of that final rule. The
final rule that responded to the petitions for consideration was
published in the Federal Register on June 16, 2008, and concluded the
rulemaking. Working group meetings were held September 27-28, 2007;
January 17-18, 2008; May 21-22, 2008; and September 25-26, 2008. The
working group has considered issues related to issuance of Emergency
Order No. 26 (prohibition on use of certain electronic devices while on
duty), and ``after arrival mandatory directives,'' among other issues.
The working group continues to work on after arrival orders, and at the
September 25-26, 2008, meeting voted to create a Highway-Rail Grade
Crossing Task Force to review highway-rail grade crossing accident
reports regarding incidents of grade crossing warning systems providing
``short or no warning'' resulting from or contributed to ``by train
operational issues'' with the intent to recommend new accident/incident
reporting codes that would better explain such events, and which may
provide information for remedial action going forward. A followup task
is to review and provide recommendations regarding supplementary
reporting of train operations-related, no-warning or short-warning
incidents that are not technically warning system activation failures,
but that result in an accident/incident or a near miss. The task force
has been formed and will begin work after other RSIA priorities are
met. Contact: Douglas Taylor,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 06-01--Locomotive Safety Standards. This task was accepted on
February 22, 2006, to review 49 CFR part 229, Railroad Locomotive
Safety Standards, and revise as appropriate. A working group was
established with the mandate to report any planned activity to the full
Committee at each scheduled full RSAC meeting, to include milestones
for completion of projects and progress toward completion. The first
working group meeting was held May 8-10, 2006. Working group meetings
were held on August 8-9, 2006; September 25-26, 2006; October 30-31,
2006; and the working group presented recommendations regarding
revisions to requirements for locomotive sanders to the full RSAC on
September 21, 2006. The NPRM regarding sanders was published in the
Federal Register on March 6, 2007 (72 FR 9904). Comments received were
discussed by the working group for clarification, and FRA published a
final rule on October 19, 2007 (72 FR 59216). The working group met on
January 9-10, 2007; November 27-28, 2007; February 5-6, 2008; May 20-
21, 2008; August 5-6, 2008; October 22-23, 2008; January 6-7, 2009; and
April 15-16, 2009. The working group has now completed the review of 49
CFR Part 229 and was unable to reach consensus regarding locomotive cab
temperature standards, locomotive alerters, and remote control
locomotives. The group reached consensus regarding critical locomotive
electronic standards, updated annual/biennial air brake standards,
clarification of the ``air brakes operate as intended'' requirement,
locomotive pilot clearance within hump classification yards,
clarification of the ``high voltage'' warning requirement, an update of
``headlight lamp'' requirements, and language to allow locomotive
records to be stored electronically. The working group presented a
draft 49 CFR part 229 rule text revision covering these items to the
RSAC for consideration at the September 10, 2009, meeting and received
approval. The NPRM was delayed due to competing RSIA priorities and the
need for additional language. The NPRM was published on January 12,
2011 (76 FR 2200), and the final rule is scheduled to be published in
December 2011. This rulemaking would amend the rules pertaining to the
Locomotive Safety Standards. The

proposed amendments would update, consolidate, and clarify existing
rules, and adopt existing industry and engineering best practices. The
proposed amendments include: Updating locomotive inspection
recordkeeping requirements by permitting electronic records;
consolidating locomotive air brake maintenance into a single provision;
clarifying locomotive headlight requirements to address new technology;
and establishing locomotive electronics standards based on existing
industry and engineering best practices, as well as other existing
Federal electronics standards. This action is taken by FRA in an effort
to improve its safety regulator program. The working group may be
called back to address comments received on the final rule after
publication. Contact: Steve Clay,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 06-03--Medical Standards for Safety-Critical Personnel. This
task was accepted on September 21, 2006, to enhance the safety of
persons in the railroad operating environment and the public by
establishing standards and procedures for determining the medical
fitness for duty of personnel engaged in safety-critical functions. A
working group was established by the full RSAC and reports its
activities and progress toward completion of this task to the full RSAC
during each meeting of the full RSAC. The first working group meeting
was held December 12-13, 2006, and the working group has held follow-on
meetings on February 20-21, 2007; July 24-25, 2007; August 29-30, 2007;
October 31-November 1, 2007; December 4-5, 2007; February 13-14, 2008;
March 26-27, 2008; April 22-23, 2008; December 8-9, 2009; February 16-
17, 2010; March 11-12, 2010; May 24-26, 2010; August 31-September 1,
2010; November 18-19, 2010; February 16-17, 2010; March 11-12, 2010;
May 24-26, 2010; August 31-September 1, 2010; November 18-19, 2010; and
September 27-28, 2011. During the working group's September 2011
meeting, the working group discussed stakeholder positions on the draft
rule text and draft medical qualification criteria and protocols, and a
preliminary cost-benefit analysis was presented to the working group by
the FRA economist. The working group tentatively agreed to proceed to
revise its draft recommendations to include a proposed option that the
medical qualification criteria be issued as medical qualification
guidelines rather than standards. The working group established a task
force to draft proposed revisions to working draft documents to be
presented to the working group for review and comment. The next working
group meeting is scheduled to be held February 1-2, 2012, in
Washington, DC. Contact: Dr. Bernard Arseneau,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Physicians Task Force. A Physicians Task Force was established by
the working group in May 2007, and tasked to draft recommended medical
qualification criteria and protocols for locomotive engineers and
conductors. The Physicians Task Force has had meetings or conference
calls on July 24, 2007; August 20, 2007; October 15, 2007; October 31,
2007; June 23-24, 2008; September 8-10, 2008; October 8, 2008; November
12-13, 2008; December 8-10, 2008; January 27-28, 2009; February 24-25,
2009; March 11-12, 2009; March 31-April 1, 2009; April 15, 2009; April
22, 2009; May 13, 2009; May 20, 2009; June 17, 2009; January 21-22,
2010; March 3, 2010; August 16-17, 2010; and October 25-26, 2010;
December 17, 2010; January 11, 2011; March 3-4, 2011; May 16-17, 2011;
August 18, 2011; August 25, 2011; August 31, 2011. On September 1,
2011, the task force notified working group members that it had made
significant progress in completing its task and requested that the
working group participate in clarifying a limited number of remaining
operational issues relevant to the task that merited review by industry
management, labor, and other stakeholders. No further meetings of the
Physicians Task Force are currently scheduled. Contact: Dr. Bernard
Arseneau,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Critical Incident Task Force. The Medical Standards Working Group
accepted RSAC Task 2009-02, Critical Incident Response, during the
December 8-9, 2010, meeting. The working group has been tasked to
provide advice regarding development of implementing regulations for
critical incident stress plans as required by the RSIA. A Critical
Incident Task Force was established by the working group during the May
24-26, 2010, Medical Standards Working Group meeting. The scheduled
kickoff meeting for the Critical Incident Task Force scheduled for
September 2, 2010, was postponed at the request of industry
participants. In late March 2011, FRA leadership decided to request
that the RSAC be asked to amend the Critical Incident task statement to
remove reference to the Medical Standards Working Group and to allow
the group to assume full working group status to expedite the work. The
Committee approved the revised task statement with a target date for
recommendations to the Committee of December 2011 and the task force
transitioned to the Critical Incident Working Group. (See Critical
Incident Working Group entry.) Contact: Dr. Bernard Arseneau, (202)
493-6002.
    Task 07-01--Track Safety Standards. This task was accepted on
February 22, 2007, to consider specific improvements to the Track
Safety Standards or other responsive actions, supplementing work
already underway on continuous welded rail (CWR) specifically to:
Review controls applied to the re-use of rail in CWR ``plug rail'';
review the issue of cracks emanating from bond wire attachments;
consider improvements in the Track Safety Standards related to
fastening of rail to concrete ties; and ensure a common understanding
within the regulated community concerning requirements for internal
rail flaw inspections. The tasks were assigned to the Track Safety
Standards Working Group. The working group will report any planned
activity to the full Committee at each scheduled full RSAC meeting,
including milestones for completion of projects and progress toward
completion. The first working group meeting was held on June 27-28,
2007, and the group met again on August 15-16, 2007, and October 23-24,
2007. Two task forces were created under the working group: Concrete
Ties Task Force and Rail Integrity Task Force. The Concrete Ties Task
Force met on November 26-27, 2007; February 13-14, 2008; April 16-17,
2008; July 9-10, 2008; and September 17-18, 2008. The Concrete Ties
Task Force finalized consensus language regarding concrete crossties
(49 CFR Part 213) and presented a recommendation to the Track Standards
Working Group at the November 20, 2008, working group meeting. The
language was approved by both the working group and the December 10,
2008, RSAC meeting and the task force was dissolved. The Concrete
Crossties NPRM was published on August 26, 2010 (75 FR 52490). The
Track Standards Working Group met on October 26-27, 2010, to discuss
the outstanding issue of plug rail. The working group reached consensus
on regulatory language regarding the reuse of plug rail and the
consensus language was presented to and approved by the RSAC Committee
during the December 14, 2010 meeting. RSAC Task 07-01 will be complete
once the final rule is issued. Contact: Carlo Patrick,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 08-03--Track Safety Standards Rail Integrity. This task was
accepted on September 10, 2008, to consider specific improvements to
the Track Safety Standards or other responsive actions designed to
enhance rail integrity. The Rail Integrity Task Force was created in
October 2007 under Task 07-01 and

first met on November 28-29, 2007. The task force met on February 12-
13, 2008; April 15-16, 2008; July 8-9, 2008; September 16-17, 2008;
February 3-4, 2009; June 16-17, 2009; October 29-30, 2009; January 20-
21, 2010; March 9-11, 2010; and April 20, 2010. Consensus has been
achieved on bond wires and a common understanding on internal rail flaw
inspections has been reached. The task force has reached consensus to
recommend to the working group that the item regarding ``the effect of
rail head wear, surface conditions and other relevant factors on the
acquisition and interpretation of internal rail flaw test results'' be
closed. The task force does not recommend regulatory action concerning
head wear. Surface conditions and their effect on test integrity has
been discussed and understood during dialogue concerning common
understanding on internal rail flaw inspections. The task force
believes that new technology has been developed that improves test
performance and will impact the effect of head wear and surface
conditions on interpretation of internal rail flaw test results.
Consensus text was developed on recommended changes that would approach
a performance-based approach to flaw detection scheduling. However, the
group did not reach consensus on what length of segment of track is
practical to use on determining test cycles. Consensus text has been
finalized for recommended changes to 49 CFR 213.113, Defective rails;
213.237, Rail inspection; and 213.241, Inspection records. The task
force has developed a new 49 CFR 213.238, Qualified operator language,
that defines the minimum requirements for the training of a rail flaw
detector car operator. The task force presented the consensus language
to the Track Standards Working Group during the July 28-30, 2010,
meeting and the Track Standards Working Group presented its consensus
recommendations to the RSAC Committee for approval during the September
23, 2010, Committee meeting. By majority vote, the RSAC accepted the
recommendations of the Track Standards Working Group and forwarded
those recommendations to the Administrator completing RSAC Task 08-03.
The associated NPRM is currently in development and RSAC Task 08-03
will be complete once the final rule is issued. Contact: Carlo Patrick,
(202) 493-6399.
    Task No. 08-04--Positive Train Control. This task was accepted on
December 10, 2008, to provide advice regarding development of
implementing regulations for Positive Train Control (PTC) systems and
their deployment under the RSIA. The task included a requirement to
convene an initial meeting no later than January 2009, and to report
recommendations back to RSAC no later than April 24, 2009. The PTC
Working Group was created in December 2008 by working group member
nominations from committee member organizations under Task 08-04 and
the kickoff meeting was held on January 26-27, 2009. The group met
again on February 11-13, 25-27; March 17-18, 2009; and March 31-April
1, 2009. On April 2, 2009, the RSAC approved the request by the working
group for agreement to vote on the draft rule text recommendations from
the working group by mail ballot. On May 11, 2009, by majority vote via
mail ballot, the RSAC accepted the recommendations of the PTC Working
Group and forwarded those recommendations to the Administrator, with
the understanding that there are other issues that FRA would be making
proposals with respect to their resolution. The NPRM was published on
July 21, 2009 (74 FR 36152), with comments due by August 20, 2009. In
addition, a public hearing was held on August 13, 2009 (74 FR 36152).
The PTC Working Group was reconvened on August 31-September 2, 2009, to
discuss comments received on the NPRM and the PTC Working Group
presented consensus rule text items to the RSAC for approval at the
September 10, 2009, meeting. The PTC consensus rule text was approved
by majority RSAC vote by electronic ballot on September 24, 2009, and
the final rule was published on January 15, 2010 (75 FR 2598). Final
rule amendments were published on September 27, 2010 (75 FR 59108). An
NPRM proposing amendments to the PTC Final Rule that would remove
various regulatory requirements that require railroads to either
conduct further analyses or meet certain risk-based criteria in order
to avoid PTC system implementation on track segments that do not
transport poison- or toxic-by-inhalation hazardous materials traffic,
and are not used for intercity or commuter rail passenger
transportation, as of December 31, 2015, was published on August 24,
2011 (76 FR 52918) with comments due by October 24, 2011. The PTC
Working Group met on October 21, 2011, to provide input for an
additional NPRM intended to address further rule considerations. FRA
did not seek consensus from the RSAC or PTC Working Group on the
substance of this NPRM, but requested the working group's valued
assistance and input in its development. No additional meetings are
scheduled at this time. Contact: Tom McFarlin,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    PTC Implementation Plan Task Force. A task force was formed to
assist FRA in developing a model template for a successful PTC
Implementation Plan (PTCIP), and in development of an example
associated Risk Prioritization Methodology. PTCIPs are required to be
submitted by April 16, 2010, under the mandate of the RSIA. FRA posted
a final version of a PTCIP template and an example risk prioritization
methodology model for prioritization of line segment implementation to
the FRA public Web site on January 12, 2010, the same day the final
rule was made available for public review. No further meetings of this
task force are currently scheduled. Contact: Tom McFarlin, (202) 493-
6203.
    PTC Risk Evaluation Task Force. The creation of the PTC Risk
Evaluation Task Force was approved by the PTC Working Group on April 1,
2010, to develop a computer model to estimate the risk of PTC-
preventable accidents on a line segment basis. The group was formed by
nominations from members of the PTC Working Group and the kickoff
meeting was held via GoTo/Webinar on June 17, 2010. A followup meeting
was held on August 3, 2010, and an additional followup GoTo/Webinar
meeting was held on September 7, 2010. No additional meetings are
scheduled at this time. Contact: Mark Hartong,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task No. 08-07--Conductor Certification. This task was accepted on
December 10, 2008, to develop regulations for certification of railroad
conductors, as required by the RSIA, and to consider any appropriate
related amendments to existing regulations and report recommendations
for proposed or interim final rule (as determined by FRA in
consultation with the Office of the Secretary of Transportation and the
Office of Management and Budget) by October 16, 2009. The Conductor
Certification Working Group was officially formed by nominations from
member organizations in April 2009, and the first meeting was held on
July 21-23, 2009. Additional meetings were held on August 25-27, 2009;
September 15-17, 2009; October 20-22, 2009; November 17-19, 2009; and
December 16-18, 2009. Tentative consensus was reached on the vast
majority of the regulatory text. The working group approved the draft
rule text by electronic ballot and the consensus draft language was
approved by the RSAC on March 18, 2010, by unanimous vote as the
recommendation from the Committee to the FRA Administrator. The
resulting NPRM was published in

the Federal Register on November 10, 2010 (75 FR 69166) and the working
group was called back to meet and review comments received on May 12,
2011, and the final rule is currently under development with a target
publication date of November 2012. This rulemaking would provide rules
and guidance for requisite train conductor certification to ensure that
individuals have the knowledge and skills necessary to perform the
duties of a train conductor. This rulemaking may propose that each
railroad adopt and comply with a written program for certifying and
recertifying the qualifications of conductors. After the final rule is
published, the working group will reconvene to make conforming
amendments to the locomotive engineer certification regulation as
appropriate. Contact: Mark McKeon,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task No. 09--01--Passenger Hours of Service. This task was accepted
on April 2, 2009, to provide advice regarding development of
implementing regulations for the hours of service of operating
employees of commuter and intercity passenger railroads under the RSIA.
The group has been tasked to review available data concerning the
effects of fatigue on the performance of subject employees and consider
the role of fatigue prevention in determining maximum hours of service.
The group has also been tasked to consider the potential for
alternative approaches to hours of service using available tools for
evaluating the impact of various crew schedules and determine the
effect of alternative approaches on the availability of employees to
support passenger service. The group is charged to report whether
existing hours of service restrictions are effective in preventing
fatigue among subject employees, whether an alternative approach to
hours of service for the subject employees would enhance safety and
whether alternative restrictions on hours of service could be coupled
with other fatigue countermeasures to promote the fitness of employees
for safety-critical duties. The Passenger Hours of Service Working
Group was officially formed through the formal Committee member
nomination process in May 2009, and the first meeting was held on June
24, 2009. Followup working group meetings were held on February 2-3,
2010; March 4-5, 2010; April 6, 2010; May 20, 2010; and June 29, 2010.
Consensus has been reached on a majority of the issues and the draft
rule text has been matured. A Passenger Hours of Service Task Force was
formed to review collected data and provide recommendations to the
working group. The task force met on January 14-15, 2010; March 30-31,
2010; and June 16, 2010. The working group approved the draft rule text
by electronic ballot on September 22, 2010, and the consensus draft
language was approved by the RSAC on October 15, 2010, by unanimous
electronic vote as the recommendation from the Committee to the FRA
Administrator. The working group met on December 9, 2010, to discuss
the approved consensus language and the NPRM preamble and the resulting
NPRM was published on March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16200), and the final rule
was published on August 12, 2011 (76 FR 50360), with an effective date
of October 15, 2011. Contact: Mark McKeon,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task No. 09-02--Critical Incident Programs. This task was accepted
on September 10, 2009, to provide advice regarding development of
implementing regulations for Critical Incident Stress Plans as required
by the RSIA. The group has been tasked to define what a ``critical
incident'' is that requires a response; review available data,
literature, and standards of practice concerning critical incident
programs to determine appropriate action when a railroad employee is
involved in or directly witnesses a critical incident; review any
evaluation studies available for existing railroad critical incident
programs; describe program elements appropriate for the rail
environment, including those requirements set forth in the RSIA;
provide an example of a suitable plan (template); and assist in the
preparation of an NPRM no later than December 2010. In late March 2011,
FRA leadership decided to request that the RSAC be asked to amend the
Critical Incident task statement to remove reference to the Medical
Standards Working Group and to allow the group to assume full working
group status to expedite the work. The Committee approved the revised
task statement with a target date for recommendations to the Committee
of December 2011. The Critical Incident Working Group kickoff meeting
was held on June 24, 2011. The draft report assessing current knowledge
of post-traumatic interventions and to advance evidence-based
recommendations for controlling the risks associated with traumatic
exposure in the railroad setting was completed and distributed to the
working group prior to the September 8-9, 2011, working group meeting.
Due to the aggressive timeline, the working group held its second
meeting on October 11-12, 2011 with a follow-on meeting scheduled for
December 13-14, 2011. Contact: Ron Hynes,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task No. 10-01--Minimum Training Standards and Plans. This task was
accepted on March 18, 2010, to establish minimum training standards for
each class and craft of safety-related railroad employee and their
railroad contractor and subcontractor equivalents, as required by RSIA.
The group has been tasked to assist FRA in developing regulations
responsive to the legislative mandate, while ensuring generally
accepted principles of adult learning are employed in training and
development and delivery; determine a reasonable method for submission
and FRA review of training plans which takes human resource limitations
into account; establish reasonable oversight criteria to ensure
training plans are effective, using the operational tests and
inspections requirements of 49 CFR Part 217 as a model. The Training
Standards Working Group was officially formed through the formal
Committee member nomination process in March 2010, and the first
meeting was held on April 13-14, 2010. A followup working group meeting
was held on June 2-3, 2010, and additional followup meetings were
scheduled for August 17-18 and September 21-22, 2010. A Task Analysis
Task Force was formed under the working group to develop a task
analysis template and met in Florence, KY, on June 22-23, 2010, with
CSX Transportation hosting the event. The group developed a 21-page
task analysis document for an outbound train yard carman position,
which is complete regarding FRA railroad safety laws, regulations, and
orders. The working group met August 17-18, and October 19-20, 2010,
and by GoTo/Webinar on November 15-16, 2010. The working group reached
consensus and the resulting training standards draft regulatory
language was presented to and approved by the RSAC Committee on
December 14, 2010. This rulemaking will (1) Establish minimum training
standards for each class or craft of safety-related employee and
equivalent railroad contractor and subcontractor employee that require
railroads, contractors, and subcontractors to qualify or otherwise
document the proficiency of such employees in each such class and craft
regarding their knowledge and ability to comply with Federal railroad
safety laws and regulations and railroad rules and procedures intended
to implement those laws and regulations, etc.; (2) require submission
of railroads', contractors', and subcontractors' training and
qualification programs for FRA approval; and (3) establish a

minimum training curriculum and ongoing training criteria, testing, and
skills evaluation measures for track and equipment inspectors employed
by railroads and railroad contractor and subcontractors. The resulting
NPRM is under development with a target publication date of January
2012. No additional working group meetings are scheduled at this time.
Contact: Michael Logue,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task No. 10-02--Safety Technology in Dark Territory. This task was
accepted on September 23, 2010, to provide advice regarding development
of standards, guidance, regulations, or orders governing the
development, use, and implementation of rail safety technology in dark
territory, as required by Section 406 of the RSIA. Specifically, to
assist FRA in developing regulations responsive to the legislative
mandate and to report recommendations to the FRA Administrator for
proposed or interim final rule (as determined by FRA in consultation
with the Office of the Secretary of Transportation and the Office of
Management and Budget) by September 30, 2011. This rulemaking would
issue standards or guidance governing development and deployment of
technology to promote safe operation in non-signaled territory in
arrangements not defined in signal inspection law. The delay in
starting this effort was caused by the PTC rulemaking, which required
the same key personnel both in government and industry. With the PTC
effort maturing, resources became available and the Dark Territory
Working Group was formed to assist FRA in developing regulations
responsive to the legislative mandate and to report recommendations to
the FRA Administrator for proposed or interim final rule (as determined
by FRA in consultation with OST and OMB). The working group met on
March 3-4, 2011, May 9-10, 2011, and September 6-7, 2011 and created
four task forces to investigate specific subject areas. A follow-on
meeting is scheduled for November 17-18, 2011, and the target date for
reporting recommendations to the RSAC Committee is December 2011.
Contact: Olga Cataldi,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task No. 11-01--Preventing Railroad Employee Distractions Caused by
Personal Electronic Devices. This task was accepted on May 20, 2011, to
prescribe mitigation strategies, programs and processes for governing
the use of personal electronic devices that could cause distractions to
railroad employees engaged in safety-critical activities. This working
group will explore additional methods to achieve compliance through
education, peer-to-peer intervention, counseling and other cooperative,
non-regulatory/punitive methods. The Electronic Device Distraction
Working Group was formed and held its kickoff meeting on October 25-26,
2011. The group is scheduled to meet next on January 11-12, 2011.
Contact: Miriam Kloeppel,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task No. 11-02--Track Inspection Time Study. This task was accepted
by the Committee electronically on August 16, 2011, to consider
specific improvements to the Track Safety Standards or other responsive
actions related to the Track Inspection Time Study required by Sections
403 (a)-(c) of the RSIA and other relevant studies and resources.
Sections 403(a) and (b) of the RSIA required a study of inspection
practices and the amount of time required for inspections under the
Track Safety Standards, and another set of revisions to those
regulations. The report was due by October 16, 2010, on the results of
a specified track inspection time and track safety study. FRA is
expected to make recommendations for rule changes and, under Section
403(c), not later than 2 years after completion of the study, prescribe
regulations based on its results. FRA organized an independent study by
an outside contractor and developed a questionnaire used to get
information from railroad track inspectors throughout the country;
interviews with railroad and union officials were also conducted for
additional perspectives. The Track Inspection Time Study was completed
and signed by the Secretary on May 2, 2011, starting the 2-year
timeline for rulemaking. The task was given to the Track Standards
Working Group and it held a kickoff meeting on October 20, 2011, and
follow-on meetings are scheduled for December 20-21, 2011; February 7-
8, and April 26-27, 2012. Contact: Ken Rusk,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Completed Tasks

    Task 96-1--(Completed) Revising the freight power brake
regulations.
    Task 96-2--(Completed) Reviewing and recommending revisions to the
Track Safety Standards (49 CFR Part 213).
    Task 96-3--(Completed) Reviewing and recommending revisions to the
Radio Standards and Procedures (49 CFR Part 220).
    Task 96-5--(Completed) Reviewing and recommending revisions to
Steam Locomotive Inspection Standards (49 CFR Part 230).
    Task 96-6--(Completed) Reviewing and recommending revisions to
miscellaneous aspects of the regulations addressing locomotive engineer
certification (49 CFR Part 240).
    Task 96-7--(Completed) Developing roadway maintenance machines (on-
track equipment) safety standards.
    Task 96-8--(Completed) This planning task evaluated the need for
action responsive to recommendations contained in a report to Congress
titled, Locomotive Crashworthiness & Working Conditions.
    Task 97-1--(Completed) Developing crashworthiness specifications
(49 CFR Part 229) to promote the integrity of the locomotive cab in
accidents resulting from collisions.
    Task 97-2--(Completed) Evaluating the extent to which
environmental, sanitary, and other working conditions in locomotive
cabs affect the crew's health and the safe operation of locomotives,
proposing standards where appropriate.
    Task 97-3--(Completed) Developing event recorder data survivability
standards.
    Task 97-4 and Task 97-5--(Completed) Defining PTC functionalities,
describing available technologies, evaluating costs and benefits of
potential systems, and considering implementation opportunities and
challenges, including demonstration and deployment.
    Task 97-6--(Completed) Revising various regulations to address the
safety implications of processor-based signal and train control
technologies, including communications-based operating systems.
    Task 97-7--(Completed) Determining damages qualifying an event as a
reportable train accident.
    Task 00-1--(Completed--task withdrawn) Determining the need to
amend regulations protecting persons who work on, under, or between
rolling equipment and persons applying, removing, or inspecting rear
end marking devices (Blue Signal Protection).
    Task 01-1--(Completed) Developing conformity of FRA's regulations
for accident/incident reporting (49 CFR Part 225) to revised
regulations of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, and to make appropriate revisions to the FRA Guide
for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports (Reporting Guide).
    Task 08-01--(Completed) Report on the Nation's railroad bridges.
Report to FRA on the current state of railroad bridge safety
management; update the findings and conclusions of the 1993 Summary
Report of the FRA Railroad Bridge Safety Survey.

    Task No. 08-06--(Completed) Hours of Service Recordkeeping and
Reporting. Develop revised recordkeeping and reporting requirements for
hours of service of railroad employees. Final rule published May 27,
2009, with an effective date of July 16, 2009. (74 FR 25330).
    Task No. 08-05--(Completed) Railroad Bridge Safety Assurance.
Develop a rule encompassing the requirements of Section 417 of the RSIA
(Railroad Bridge Safety Assurance), of RSIA bridge failure. Final rule
published July 15, 2010 (75 FR-41282).
    Task 06-02--(Completed) Track Safety Standards and CWR. Issue
requirements for inspection of joint bars in CWR to detect cracks that
could affect the integrity of the track structure published a final
rule on August 25, 2009, with correcting amendment published on October
21, 2009.
    Please refer to the notice published in the Federal Register on
March 11, 1996, (61 FR 9740) for more information about the RSAC.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 21, 2011.
Brenda J. Moscoso,
Director, Office of Safety Analysis, Risk Reduction, and Crossing/
Trespasser Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-30476 Filed 11-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P