Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 8, 2009 / Notices 46293 

electronic data sharing in lieu of paper 

hazardous materials shipping 

documents. 

DATES: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 9 

a.m.–3:30 p.m. and Wednesday October 

14, 2009 9 a.m.–3:30 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the DOT Headquarters, West Building, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

Notification: Persons planning to 

attend should send an e-mail to 

ryan.paguet@dot.gov including their 

name and contact information 

(company/address/telephone). 

Conference Call Capability/Live 

Meeting Information: Due to the nature 

and length of the meeting, remote 

access/call-in capability will not be 

provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Ryan Paquet, P.G., Assistant Director, 

Office of International Standards, Office 

of Hazardous Materials Safety, 

Department of Transportation, 

Washington, DC 20590; (202) 366–0656. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

primary purpose of this public meeting 

will be to discuss the forthcoming HM– 

ACCESS Proof of Concept Study and 

specify requirements to be included in 

the Study’s statement of work. In 

holding this public meeting, PHMSA 

seeks to receive feedback from a wide 

audience, representing myriad portions 

of the HM industry, including HM 

shippers, transporters, freight 

forwarders, emergency responders, 

other government agencies, technology 

providers, etc. 

PHMSA’s HM–ACCESS initiative 

aims to identify and eliminate barriers 

to the use of paperless tracking and 

hazard communications technologies, 

thereby (1) improving the availability 

and accuracy of hazard information; (2) 

improving the speed by which 

information is available to emergency 

responders when incidents occur; (3) 

and allowing U.S. companies to 

compete more effectively in the global 

economy by using the best tools 

available. 

Spurred by competitive demands, 

just-in-time delivery requirements, and 

the globalization of supply chains, the 

transportation and logistics industries 

have embraced modern communication 

technologies; yet hazardous materials 

transport remains in a world of paper. 

The HM sector has harnessed many of 

the same technologies for streamlining 

commercial interchange, but 

information about shipments and 

packages is conveyed by markings on 

the package, placards on the vehicle, 

and shipping papers. Paper-based 

communication is slow, limits the 

information available, and is fraught 

with the potential for error. 

Inefficiencies and errors in the handling 

of hazardous materials produce 

increased risk throughout the transport 

chain due to increased storage time, 

mishandling, and ineffective or 

inaccurate hazard communication. 

Moreover, paper-based communication 

may be least effective at the very time 

when hazard communication is most 

critical—in the immediate aftermath of 

a transportation incident. 

We expect the integration of 

electronic transfer of shipping 

information to be generational. A 

number of hazardous materials carriers, 

vessel, rail, and air transport 

organizations have stated that they are 

ready to begin utilizing electronic 

shipping paper technology, subject only 

to regulatory authorization. In the 

highway mode, the larger, 

technologically-advanced companies 

may be prepared to implement 

electronic systems, but widespread use 

among the industry is a longer-term 

proposition. In any case, however, no 

part of the HM transportation sector can 

transition to new hazard 

communication systems without 

ensuring that emergency response 

officials are prepared and equipped to 

receive the hazard information at least 

as quickly and reliably as under the 

current system. 

Discussion points include: 

1. What are shipping papers used for? 

2. What information from a shipping 

paper should be immediately conveyed 

to emergency responders in the event of 

an incident? 

3. What work has been/is being done 

on standardizing shipping paper 

information? 

4. When electronic shipping papers 

are used, how is required information 

shared with emergency responders 

(professional, volunteer, urban, rural, 

etc.)? How is it shared with compliance 

inspectors/officers? 

5. What benefits will electronic 

shipping papers have for companies 

shipping HM? HM transporters? Freight 

forwarders? Emergency responders? 

Other government agencies? 

6. What challenges will electronic 

shipping papers create for companies 

shipping HM? HM transporters? Freight 

forwarders? Emergency responders? 

Other government agencies? 

7. What existing efforts (government 

or private) are related to HM–ACCESS? 

Can these efforts be coordinated? 

For more information on the HM– 

ACCESS and to check for updates on 

information related to this public 

meeting visit PHMSA’s HM–ACCESS 

Web site at http://hazmat.dot.gov/HM– 

ACCESS/index.html. 

R. Ryan Posten, 

Acting Associate Administrator for 

Hazardous Materials Safety. 

[FR Doc. E9–21415 Filed 9–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–60–M 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Petition for Waiver of Compliance 

In accordance with Part 211 of Title 

49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 

notice is hereby given that the Federal 

Railroad Administration (FRA) received 

a request for a waiver of compliance 

with certain requirements of its safety 

standards. The individual petition is 

described below, including the party 

seeking relief, the regulatory provisions 

involved, the nature of the relief being 

requested, and the petitioner’s 

arguments in favor of relief. 

City of Plano, Illinois 

Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA– 

2009–0066 

The City of Plano, Illinois (City) seeks 

a permanent waiver of compliance from 

a certain provision of the Use of 

Locomotive Horns at Highway-Rail 

Grade Crossings, 49 CFR Part 222. The 

City intends to establish a New Quiet 

Zone under the provisions of 49 CFR 

Part 222.39. Specifically, the City is 

seeking a waiver from the provisions of 

49 CFR Part 222.9, definition of a nontraversable curb so that an existing 

public crossing that is equipped with 

flashing lights, gates and medians that 

complies with all of the requirements 

necessary to be a ‘‘gates and medians’’ 

supplemental safety measure (SSM) 

with non-traversable curbs, except for 

the fact that the posted highway speed 

limit is 45 miles per hour (mph) instead 

of 40 mph as required in the definition, 

be deemed an acceptable SSM. 

49 CFR Part 222.9, the definition of 

Non-traversable curb reads as follows: 

‘‘Non-traversable curb means a highway 

curb designed to discourage a motor 

vehicle from leaving the roadway. Nontraversable curbs are used at locations 

where highway speeds do not exceed 40 

miles per hour and are at least six 

inches high. Additional design 

specifications are determined by the 

standard traffic design specifications 

used by the governmental entity 

constructing the curb.’’ 

The City is in the process of 

establishing a new quiet zone along the 

BNSF Railway’s (BNSF) Chicago 

Division, Mendota Subdivision, which 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
46294 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 8, 2009 / Notices 

would extend from approximately 

Milepost 48.71 to Milepost 50.76. The 

new quiet zone will consist of two 

public at-grade crossings: Eldamain 

Road (DOT #079586F) and Needham 

(DOT #079588U). The City seeks a 

waiver from the requirement that 

medians with non-traversable curbing 

may not be used where highway speeds 

exceed 40 mph. The Eldamain Road 

grade crossing is equipped with 

standard flashing lights, flashing lights 

on cantilevers, gates and medians that 

are 200 feet in length. The curbing on 

the medians is at least 6 inches in 

height. The posted highway speed is 45 

mph. 

The City provides several reasons 

why the 5 mph difference in speed limit 

would not diminish the effectiveness of 

the SSM, and thus the waiver should be 

granted. First, the existing median is 

much wider (12-foot) than the typical 

medians used for this application. The 

median is also twice as long as the 

nominal required length (100-foot) as it 

is 200 feet in length. The City points out 

that the median installation has 

performed properly and without 

incident since its installation, 

approximately 13 years ago. 

Secondly, the design used by the 

Kendall County Highway Department 

(the public authority responsible for 

roadway and has consented to the 

establishment of the proposed new quiet 

zone) follows the Illinois Department of 

Transportation standard which allows 

curbed medians on highways with 

speed limits of 40 or 45 mph. The City 

feels that this standard should be 

allowable under the clause ‘‘Additional 

design specifications * * *’’ in the 

definition. 

Lastly, the City states that the Kendall 

County Highway Department opposes 

the creation of a 40 mph speed zone in 

the vicinity of the crossing as it wants 

to avoid multiple speed zones on the 

same roadway. However, the County 

Engineer has expressed a willingness to 

post advisory 40 mph signs in advance 

of the crossing in each direction. 

The City’s waiver petition did not 

directly address efforts made to have the 

BNSF join in the waiver request. 

However, attachments that were 

included with the waiver request 

indicated that communication between 

the two parties on the subject of a joint 

waiver request did occur. On June 15, 

2009, a representative of the consulting 

firm utilized by the City to assist with 

the establishment of the new quiet zone 

sent an e-mail to the Manager of Public 

Projects for BNSF. The e-mail 

specifically requested that BNSF 

participate in the process so that the 

waiver could be forwarded to FRA as a 

‘‘joint waiver request’’ and to reconsider 

its interpretation of the definition of the 

non-traversable curb. In a letter to the 

City dated June 22, 2009, BNSF 

acknowledged receipt of the joint 

waiver request but did not specifically 

address the issue. BNSF stated that the 

questions should be posed to FRA and 

that BNSF was going by FRA’s 

regulation which provides that the 

highway speed must be 40 mph or less. 

The City did not provide any 

justification as to why the absence of 

BNSF’s participation in the waiver 

would affect safety. 

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–2009– 

0066) and may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

• Web site: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• 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 

comment (or signing the comment, 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 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78). 

Issued in Washington, DC on August 31, 

2009. 

Grady C. Cothen, Jr., 

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety 

Standards and Program Development. 

[FR Doc. E9–21503 Filed 9–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Petition for Waiver of Compliance 

In accordance with Part 211 of Title 

49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 

notice is hereby given that the Federal 

Railroad Administration (FRA) received 

a request for a waiver of compliance 

with certain requirements of its safety 

standards. The individual petition is 

described below, including the party 

seeking relief, the regulatory provisions 

involved, the nature of the relief being 

requested, and the petitioner’s 

arguments in favor of relief. 

City of Vancouver, Washington 

Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA– 

2009–0053 

The City of Vancouver, Washington 

(City) seeks a temporary waiver of 

compliance from certain provisions of 

the Use of Locomotive Horns at 

Highway-Rail Grade Crossings, 49 CFR 

Part 222. The City intends to establish 

a New Partial Quiet Zone under the 

provisions of 49 CFR 222.39. 

Specifically, the City is seeking a waiver 

from: (1) The provisions of 49 CFR 

222.9, definition of a New Partial Quiet 

Zone so that the hours of the new partial 

quiet zone will be from 10 p.m. to 6 

a.m.; and (2) the provisions of 49 CFR 

222.35(b)(1) so that the active grade 

crossing warning devices at Jefferson 

Street are not required to be equipped 

with constant warning time devices. 

49 CFR 222.9, definition of New 

Partial Quiet Zone reads as follows: 

‘‘New Partial Quiet Zone means a 

segment of a rail line within which is 

situated one or a number of consecutive 

public highway-rail crossings at which 

locomotive horns are not routinely 

sounded between the hours of 10 p.m. 

and 7 a.m., but are routinely sounded 

during the remaining portion of the day, 

and which does not qualify as a PreRule Partial Quiet Zone or an 

Intermediate Partial Quiet Zone.’’ 

49 CFR 222.35(b)(1) reads as follows: 

‘‘Each public highway-rail grade 

crossing in a New Quiet Zone 

established under this part must be 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES