### DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT)
Introduction: Department Overview and Summary of Regulatory Priorities

The Department of Transportation (DOT) consists of 10 operating administrations and the Office of the Secretary, each of which has statut ory responsibility for a wide range of regulations. DOT regulates safety in the aviation, motor carrie r, railroad, motor vehicle, commercial space, and pipeline transportation areas. DOT also r egulates aviation consumer and economic issues and provides financial assistance for programs involving highways, airports, public transportation, the maritime industry, railroads, and motor vehicle safety. The Department writes regulations to carry out a variety of statutes ranging from t he Americans With Disabilities Act to the Uniform Time Act. Finally, DOT develops and implements a wide range of regulations that govern internal programs such as acquisitions and grants, acce ss for the disabled, environmental protection, energy conservation, information technology, occupational safety and health, property asset management, seismic safety, and the use of aircraft and vehicles.

The Department’s Regulatory Priorities

The Department’s regulatory priorities respond to the challenges and opportunities we face. Our mission generally is as follows:

The national objectives of general welfare, econom ic growth and stability, and the security of the United States require the development of transportation policies and programs that contribute to providing fast, safe, efficient, and convenient transportation at the lowest cost consistent with those and other national obj ectives, including the efficient use and

conservation of the resources of the United States.

To help us achieve our mission, we have five strategic goals:

###  Safety: Improve public health and safety by reducing transportation-related fatalities and
injuries.

 State of Good Repair: Ensure the U.S. proa ctively maintains its critical transportation infrastructure in a state of good repair.

 Economic Competitiveness: Promote transport ation policies and investments that bring lasting and equitable economic benefits to the Nation and its citizens.

 Livable Communities: Foster livable co mmunities through place-based policies and
investments that increase transportation choi ces and access to transportation services.

 Environmental Sustainability: Advance environ mentally sustainable policies and investments that reduce carbon and other harmful emissions from transportation sources.

In identifying our regulatory priorities for the next year, the Department considered its mission and goals and focused on a number of factors, including the following:

 The relative risk being addressed

 Requirements imposed by statute or other law

 Actions on the National Transportation Safety Board “Most Wanted List”

 The costs and benefits of the regulations

 The advantages of nonregulatory alternatives

 Opportunities for deregulatory action

 The enforceability of any rule, including the effect on agency resources

This regulatory plan identifie s the Department’s regulator y priorities—the 16 pending rulemakings chosen from among the dozens of sign ificant rulemakings listed in the Department’s

### broader regulatory agenda that the Department believes will merit special attention in the upcoming year. The rules included in the regula tory plan embody the Department’s focus on our strategic goals.

The regulatory plan reflects the Department’s pr imary focus on safety—a focus that extends across several modes of transportation. For example:

 The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) w ill continue its efforts to implement safety
management systems.

 The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administrati on (FMCSA) continues its work to strengthen the requirements for Electronic On-Board Recorders.

 The FMCSA will continue its work to revise motor carrier safety fitness procedures.

 The National Highway Traffic Safety Admini stration (NHTSA) will cont inue its rulemaking to reduce death and injury resulting from incidents involving motorcoaches.

We are taking actions to address other important issues. For example:

 The NHTSA is engaged in a major rulemaking to address fuel economy standards for passenger cars and light trucks.

 The Office of the Secretary of Transportati on (OST) remains focused on aviation consumer rulemaking designed to further safeguard the interests of consumers flying the Nation’s skies.

Each of the rulemakings in the regulatory plan is described below in detail. In order to place them in context, we first review the Department’s regulatory philosophy and our initiatives to educate and inform the public about transportation safety issues. We then describe the role of the Department’s regulatory process and other im portant regulatory initiatives of OST and of each of the Department’s components. Since each tran sportation “mode” within the Department has its own area of focus, we summarize the regulatory priorities of each mode and of OST, which

### supervises and coordinates modal initiatives and ha s its own regulatory responsibilities, such as consumer protection in the aviation industry.

The Department’s Regulatory Philosophy and Initiatives

The Department has adopted a regulatory philo sophy that applies to all its rulemaking activities. This philosophy is articulated as follows: DOT regulations must be clear, simple, timely, fair, reasonable, and necessary. They w ill be issued only after an appropriate opportunity for public comment, which must provide an equal chance for all affected interests to participate, and after appropriate consultation with other gover nmental entities. The Department will fully

consider the comments received. It will assess the risks addressed by the rules and their costs and benefits, including the cumulative effects. The Department will consider appropriate alternatives, including nonregulatory approaches. It will also make every effort to ensure that regulation does not impose unreasonable mandates.

The Department stresses the importance of c onducting high-quality rulemakings in a timely manner and reducing the number of old rulemakings. To implement this, the Department has required the following actions: (1) Regular meetings of senior DOT officials to ensure effective policy leadership and timely decisions, (2) effectiv e tracking and coordination of rulemakings, (3) regular reporting, (4) early briefi ngs of interested offi cials, (5) regular training of staff, and (6) adequate allocations of resources. The Department has achieved significant success because of

this effort. It allows the De partment to use its resources more effectively and efficiently.

The Department's regulatory policies and proc edures provide a comprehensive internal management and review process for new and existing regulations and ensure that the Secretary and other appropriate appointed officials review and concur in all significant DOT rules. DOT continually seeks to improve its regulatory process. A few examples include: The Department’s development of regulatory process and related traini ng courses for its employees; its use of an

### electronic, Internet-accessible dock et that can also be used to submit comments electronically; a “list serve” that allows the public to sign up for e-mail notification when the Department issues a rulemaking document; creation of an electronic rulemaking tracking and coordination system; the use of direct final rulemaking; the use of regulat ory negotiation; a continually expanding Internet page that provides important regulatory information, including “effects” reports and status reports (http://regs.dot.gov/); and the conti nued exploration and us e of Internet blogs and other Web 2.0 technology to increase and enhance public participation in its rulemaking process.

In addition, the Department continues to engage in a wide variety of activities to help cement the partnerships between its agencies and its customers that will produce good results for transportation programs and safety. The Depart ment's agencies also have established a number of continuing partnership mechanisms in the form of rulemaking advisory committees.

Retrospective Review of Existing Regulations

In accordance with Executive Order (E.O.) 13563 ‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,” the Department actively engaged in a special retrospective review of our existing rules to determine whether they need to be revised or re voked. This review was in addition to those

reviews in accordance with section 610 of t he Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 12866, and the Department's Regulatory Policies and Proc edures. As part of this effort, we also reviewed our processes for determining what ru les to review and ensuring the rules are effectively reviewed. As a result of the review, we identified many rules for expedited review and changes to our retrospective review process. Ou r retrospective review plan in response to E.O. 13563 can be found at www.regs.dot.gov; the results of the review of our rules can also be found there and in appendix D to our regulatory agenda.

Each rulemaking initiated as a result of the retrospective review is included in the list below with a Regulation Identification Number (RIN) to assist in following the action through the

### rulemaking process . Additionally, at the end of each title, existing rulemaking actions will be
been identified by adding “RRR” and those th at are new will be indicated by “RRR*”.



## RIN TITLE LIKELY POTENTIAL FOR POSITIVE EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESSES

2120

‐ AJ94 Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS) (RRR*) Y

2120

‐ AJ97 14 CFR Part 16; Rules of Practice for Federally

‐ Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings (RRR*)

2120

‐ AK00 Medical Certificate Endorsement Issue (RRR*)

2120

‐ AK01 Combined Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs for Operators Conducting Commercial Air Tours (RRR*) Y

2120

‐ AK03 CAT III Definitions (RRR*)

2125

‐ AF41 National Standards for Traffic Control Devices; the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways; Engineering Judgments (RRR)

2125

‐ AF43 National Standards for Traffic Control Devices; the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways; Compliance Dates Revision (RRR*)

2127

‐ AK98 Pedestrian Safety Global Technical Regulation (GTR) (RRR*) Y

2127

‐ AK99 Federal Motor Vehicle Standard No. 108; Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment ‐ Color Boundaries (RRR*) Y

2127

‐ Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108; Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment ‐ Reconsideration

## AL00 (RRR*)

2127

‐ AL02 FMVSS No. 126, Petition for Reconsideration of Electronic Stability Control (ESC) (RRR*)

2127

‐ AL03 Part 571 FMVSS No. 205, Glazing Materials, GTR (RRR*) Y

2127

‐ AL05 Amend FMVSS No. 210 to Incorporate the Use of a New Force Application Device (RRR*)

2130

‐ AC06 Training Standards for Railroad Employees (RRR)

2130

‐ AC16 Locomotive Safety Standards Amendments (RRR) Y

2130

‐ AC27 Positive Train Control Systems Amendments (RRR*)

2132

‐ AB02 Major Capital Investment Projects (RRR)

2133

‐ AB74 Cargo Preference (RRR)

2133

‐ AB77 MARAD NEPA Procedures (RRR*)

2133

‐ AB78 Transportation Priority Allocation System, Part 341 (RRR*)

2133

‐ AB79 Administrative Claims, Part 327 (RRR*)

2133

‐ AB80 Operating Differential Subsidy and Construction Differential Subsidy Programs (RRR*)

2133

‐ AB81 Foreign Transfer Regulations (RRR*)

## 2133

‐ AB82 War Risk Ship Valuation (RRR*)

2137

‐ AE77 Hazardous Materials: Minor Editorial Corrections and Clarifications (RRR*)

2137

‐ AE78 Hazardous Materials: Miscellaneous Amendments (RRR*) Y

2137

‐ AE79 Hazardous Materials: Miscellaneous Amendments; Petitions for Rulemaking (RRR*) Y

2137

‐ AE80 Hazardous Materials: Miscellaneous Pressure Vessel Requirements (DOT Spec Cylinders) (RRR*) Y

2137

‐ AE81 Hazardous Materials: Reverse Logistics (RRR*) Y

2137

‐ AE82 Hazardous Materials: Incorporation of Certain Special Permits and Competent Authorities into the HMR (RRR*) Y



## * Some of the entries on this list may be completed actions, which do not appear in The Regulatory Plan/Agenda . However, more information can be found about these completed rulemakings in past publications of the Unifi ed Agenda on Reginfo.gov in the Completed Actions section for DOT.

The Department will also continue its effo rts to use advances in technology to improve its rulemaking management process. For example, the Department created an effective tracking system for significant rulemakings to ensure that either rules are completed in a timely manner or delays are identified and fixed. Through this tracking system, a monthly status report is generated. To make its efforts more transparent, the Department has made this report Internet accessible at www.regs.dot.gov, as well as through a list-serve. By doing this, the Department is providing valuable information concerning our rulemaking activity and is providing information necessary for the public to evaluate the Department's progress in meeting its commitment to completing quality rulemakings in a timely manner.

### The Department continues to place great emphasis on the need to complete high-quality rulemakings by involving senior departmental o fficials in regular meetings to resolve issues expeditiously.

Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST)

The Office of the Secretary (OST) oversees the regulatory process for the Department. OST implements the Department's regulatory policies and procedures and is responsible for ensuring the involvement of top management in regulat ory decisionmaking. Through the General Counsel's office, OST is also responsible for en suring that the Department complies with the
Administrative Procedure Act, Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), DOT’s Regulatory Policies and Procedures, and other legal and policy requirements affecting rulemaking. Although OST’s principal role concerns the review of the Department’s significant rulemakings, this office has the lead role in the substance of projects concerning aviation

economic rules and other rules that affe ct multiple elements of the Department.

OST provides guidance and training r egarding compliance with regulatory requirements and process for use by personnel throughout the Depar tment. OST also plays an instrumental role in the Department’s efforts to improve our econ omic analyses; risk assessments; regulatory flexibility analyses; other related analyses; and data quality, including peer reviews.

OST also leads and coordinates the Depart ment’s response to the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) intergovernmental review of ot her agencies’ significant rulemaking documents and to Administration and congressional proposal s that concern the regulatory process. The General Counsel’s office works closely with representatives of other agencies, OMB, the White House, and congressional staff to provide inform ation on how various proposals would affect the ability of the Department to perform its safety, infrastructure, and other missions.

### During fiscal year 2012, OST will continue to focus its efforts on enhancing airline passenger protections by requiring carriers to adopt various consumer service practices under the following rulemaking initiatives:

 Accessibility of Carrier Websit es and Ticket Kiosks (2105-AD96)

 Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections III (2105-AE11)

 Carrier-Supplied Medical Oxygen, Accessible In-Flight Entertainment Systems, Service
Animals, and Accessible Lavatories on Single-Aisle Aircraft (2105-AE12).

OST will also continue its efforts to help coor dinate the activities of several operating
administrations that advance various departmen tal efforts that support the Administration’s initiatives on promoting safety, stimulating the economy and creating jobs, sustaining and building America’s transportation infrastructure, and im proving livability for the people and communities who use transportation systems subj ect to the Department’s policies.

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

The Federal Aviation Administration is charged with safely and efficiently operating and maintaining the most complex aviation system in the world. It is guided by Destination 2025—a transformation of the Nation’s aviation system in which air traffic will move safely, swiftly, efficiently, and seamlessly around the globe. Our vision is to develop new systems and to

enhance a culture that increases the safety, reliability, efficiency, capacity, and environmental performance of our aviation system. To m eet our vision will require enhanced skills, clear communication, strong leadership, effective m anagement, innovative technology, new equipment, advanced system oversight, and global integration.

FAA activities that may lead to rulema king in fiscal year 2012 include continuing to:

###  Promote and expand safety information-sharing efforts, such as FAA-industry partnerships and data-driven safety programs that prioritize and address risks before they lead to accidents. Specifically, F AA will continue implementing Commercial Aviation Safety Team projects related to controlled flight into terr ain, loss of control of an aircraft, uncontained engine failures, runway incursions, weather, pilot decisionmaking, and cabin safety. Some of these projects may result in rulemaking and guidance materials.

 Work cooperatively to harmonize the U.S. avia tion regulations with those of other countries, without compromising rigorous safety standards. The differences worldwide in certification
standards, practice and procedures, and operati ng rules must be identified and minimized to reduce the regulatory burden on the internationa l aviation system. The differences between the FAA regulations and the requirements of other nations impose a heavy burden on U.S. aircraft manufacturers and operators, some of which are small businesses. Standardization should help the U.S. aerospace industry rema in internationally competitive. The FAA continues to publish regulations based on recommendations of Aviation Rulemaking Committees that are the result of cooper ative rulemaking between the U.S. and other

countries.

 Develop and implement Safety Management Systems (SMS) where these systems will improve safety of aviation and aviation-related activities. An SMS proactively identifies potential hazards in the operating environmen t, analyzes the risks of those hazards, and encourages mitigation prior to an accident or in cident. In its most general form, an SMS is a set of decisionmaking tools that can be used to plan, organize, direct, and control activities in a manner that enhances safety.

FAA top regulatory priorities for 2011 through 2012 include:

 Qualification, Service, and Use of Crewmem bers and Aircraft Dispatchers (2120-AJ00)

 Helicopter Air Ambulance and Commercial He licopter Safety Initiatives and Miscellaneous Amendments (2120-AJ53)

 Congestion Management for LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and

### Newark Liberty International Airport (2120-AJ89)

 Safety Management System for Certificate Ho lders Operating Under 14 CFR Part 121 (2120- AJ86)

The Crewmember and Aircraft Dispatcher Training rulemaking would:

 Reduce human error and improve performance;

 Enhance traditional training programs through the use of flight simulation training devices for flight crewmembers; and

 Include additional training in areas critical to safety.

The Air Ambulance and Commercial Helicopter rulemaking would:

 Codify current agency guidance

 Address National Transportation Safety Board recommendations;

 Provide certificate holders and pilots with tool s and procedures that will aid in reducing accidents, including potential equipage requirements; and

 Amend all part 135 commercial helicopter operations regulations to include pilot training and
alternate airport weather minimums.

The Congestion Management rulemaking for LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy
International Airport, and Newark Libe rty International Airport would:

 Replace the orders limiting scheduled operations at John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), limiting scheduled operations at Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR), and limiting scheduled and unscheduled operati ons at LaGuardia Airport (LGA); and

 Provide a longer-term and comprehensive approach to congestion management at JFK,
EWR, and LGA

The Safety Management System for Certific ate Holders Operating Under 14 CFR Part 121 rulemaking would:

###  Require certain certificate holders to develop and implement an SMS;

 Propose a general framework from which a certificate holder can build its SMS; and

 Conform to International Civil Aviation Organization Annexes and adopt several National Transportation Safety Board recommendations.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) carries out the Federal highway program in partnership with State and local agencies to meet the Nation’s transportation needs. The
FHWA’s mission is to improve continually t he quality and performance of our Nation’s highway system and its intermodal connectors.

Consistent with this mission, the FHWA will continue:

 With ongoing regulatory initiatives in sup port of its surface transportation programs;

 To implement legislation in the least bu rdensome and restrictiv e way possible; and

 To pursue regulatory reform in areas where project development can be streamlined or
accelerated, duplicative requirements can be co nsolidated, recordkeeping requirements can be reduced or simplified, and the decisionmaking authority of our State and local partners can

be increased.

FHWA's top regulatory priority for the fiscal year is to address the rulemaking actions outlined in the DOT Plan for Implementation of Execut ive Order 13563. In particular, FHWA will undertake two rulemakings that propose change s to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The first of these rule makings (RIN 2125-AF41, Engineering Judgment) would clarify the use of engineering judgment and studies in the application of traffic control devices. A separate rulemaking (RIN 2125-AF43, Compliance Dates Revision) would revise the

### compliance dates for certain requirements in the MUTCD. Consistent with the principles outlined in Executive Order 13563, the FHWA anticipates these actions would provide clarity and needed flexibility, as well as reduce burdens on State and local governments. We believe our approach in both rulemakings is consistent with the requi rements of Executive Order 13563, including its emphasis on consideration of benefit s and costs (sections 1(a) and 1(b)), its requirement of an open exchange of information with stakeholders (s ection 2(a)), and, in particular, its call for retrospective analysis of existing rules, includi ng streamlining and modification to make such rules less burdensome (section 6). These rulema kings are also consistent with a Presidential Memorandum regarding Administrative Flexibility, which calls for reducing burdens an d promoting flexibility for State and local governments.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)

The mission of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is to reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities involving commercial trucks and buses. A strong regulatory program is a cornerstone of FMCSA’s compliance and enforcement efforts to advance this safety mission. FMCSA develops new and more effective safety regulations based on three core priorities: Raising the bar for entry, maintaining high st andards, and removing high-risk behavior. In addition to Agency-directed regulations, FMCSA develops regulations mandated by Congress,
such as the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Effi cient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). FMCSA regulations establ ish standards for motor carriers, drivers, vehicles, and State agencies receiving certain motor carrier safety grants and issuing commercial

drivers’ licenses.

FMCSA’s regulatory plan for FY 2012 includes completion of a number of rulemakings that are high priorities for the Agency because they would have a positive impact on safety. Among the rulemakings included in the plan are: (1) Carrier Safety Fitness Determination (RIN 2126-AB11) and (2) National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners (RIN 2126-AA97).

### Together, these priority rules could help to substantially improve commercial motor vehicle (CMV) safety on our Nation’s highways by improv ing FMCSA’s ability to provide safety oversight

of motor carriers and drivers.

In FY 2012, FMCSA will continue its work on the Comprehensive Safety Analysis (CSA). The CSA initiative will improve the way FMCSA identifies and conducts carrier compliance and enforcement operations over the coming years. CSA’s goal is to improve large truck and bus safety by assessing a wider range of safety perfo rmance data from a larger segment of the motor carrier industry through an array of progressive compliance interventions. FMCSA anticipates that the impacts of CSA and its associated rulema king to put into place a new safety fitness standard will enable the Agency to prohibit “ unfit” carriers from operating on the Nation’s highways (the Carrier Safety Fitness Determin ation(RIN 2126-AB11)) and will contribute further to the Agency’s overall goal of decreasing CMV-related fatalities and injuries.

Also in FY 2012, FMCSA plans to issue a final rule on the National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners (RIN 2126-AA97) to establish training and testing requirements for healthcare professionals who issue medical ce rtificates to CMV drivers.

In order to manage its rulemaking agenda, FM CSA continues to involve senior Agency leaders at the earliest stages of its rulemakings and c ontinues to refine its regulatory development process. The Agency also holds senior exec utives accountable for meeting deadlines for completing rulemakings.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

The statutory responsibilities of the Nati onal Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) relating to motor vehicles include reducing the number of, and mitigating the effects of, motor

### vehicle crashes and related fatalities and injuries; providing safety performance information to aid prospective purchasers of vehicles, child rest raints, and tires; and improving automotive fuel efficiency. NHTSA pursues policies that encourage the development of nonregulatory approaches when feasible in meeting its stat utory mandates. It issues new standards and regulations or amendments to existing standards and regulations when appropriate. It ensures that regulatory alternatives reflect a careful assessment of the problem and a comprehensive analysis of the benefits, costs, and other impacts associated with the prop osed regulatory action. Finally, it considers alternatives consistent with the Administration’s regulatory principles.

NHTSA continues to focus on the high-priorit y vehicle safety issue of motorcoaches and their occupants, and will publish several notices in fiscal year 2012 to that end. NHTSA will issue a final rule to require the installation of lap/shoulder belts in newly manufactured motorcoaches in accordance with NHTSA’s 2007 Motorcoach Safety Plan and DOT’s 2009 departmental Motorcoach Safety Action Plan. NHTSA is also considering proposing new Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) for moto rcoach rollover structural inte grity requirements, as well as requirements for electronic stability control syst ems for motorcoaches and truck tractors. Together, these three rulemaking actions will address 12 recommendations issued by the National Transportation Safety Board related to motorcoach safety.

In fiscal year 2012, NHTSA will continue it s efforts to reduce domestic dependency on foreign oil in accordance with the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 by publishing, in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Ag ency (EPA), a joint final rule setting corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for li ght trucks and passenger cars for model years 2017 and beyond. To further enhance the safety of passenger vehicles and pedestrians, NHTSA is considering proposing, in response to t he Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010, a FMVSS to provide a means of alerting blind and ot her pedestrians of moto r vehicle operation.

### In addition to numerous programs that focus on the safe performance of motor vehicles, the Agency is engaged in a variety of programs to im prove driver and occupant behavior. These programs emphasize the human aspects of motor vehicle safety and recognize the important role of the States in this common pursuit. NHTSA has identified two high-priority areas: Safety belt use and impaired driving. To address these iss ue areas, the Agency is focusing especially on three strategies—conducting highly visible, we ll-publicized enforcement; supporting prosecutors who handle impaired driving cases and expanding the use of DWI/Drug Courts, which hold offenders accountable for receiving and completing treatment for alcohol abuse and dependency; and adopting alcohol screening and brief intervention by medical and health care professionals. Other behavioral efforts encourage child sa fety-seat use; combat excessive speed and aggressive driving; improve motorcycle, bicycl e, and pedestrian safety; and provide consumer information to the public.

Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)

FRA's current regulatory program contains numerous mandates resulting from the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA08), as well as actions supporting the Department's High-Speed Rail Strategic Plan. RSIA08 alone has resulted in at least 20 rulemaking actions, which are competing for limited resources to meet statutory deadlines. FRA has prioritized these rulemakings according to the greatest effect on safety, as well as expressed congressional interest, and will work to complete as many rule makings as possible prior to their statutory deadlines. Revised timelines for completion of unfinished regulations will be forwarded to Congress for consideration.

Through the Railroad Safety Advisory Co mmittee (RSAC), FRA is working to complete many of the RSIA08 actions that include developing r equirements for train conductor certification, roadway worker protection, track safety, al cohol and drug testing of maintenance-of-way personnel, and training for railroad employees. Other RSAC-supported actions that advance

### high-speed passenger rail include proposed revision s to the Track Safety Standards dealing with

vehicle-track interaction. FRA is also initia ting a rulemaking related to the development of railroad risk reduction and system safety programs, which will be a multi-year effort due to the underlying statutory requirements that must be undertaken prior to the issuance of any final rule. Finally, FRA will be engaging in two rulemaking proceedings to address various issues related to the implementation of positive train control syst ems. FRA expects these regulatory actions to provide substantial benefits to the industry wh ile ensuring the safe and effective implementation of the technology.

Federal Transit Administration (FTA)

FTA helps communities support public transportation by making grants of Federal funding for
transit vehicles, construction of transit facilities, and planning and operation of transit and other transit-related purposes. FTA regulatory activity implements the laws that apply to recipients’ uses of Federal funding and the terms and conditions of FTA grant awards. FTA policy regarding regulations is to:

 Provide maximum benefit to the mobility of t he Nation’s citizens an d the connectivity of transportation infrastructure;

 Provide maximum local discretion;

 Ensure the most productive use of limited Federal resources;

 Protect taxpayer investments in public transportation;

 Incorporate principles of sound managem ent into the grant management process.

As the needs for public transportation have changed over the years, the Federal transit programs have grown in number and complexity. FTA’s regulatory priorities for the coming year will reflect the mandates of the Agency’s authorizatio n statute, including, most notably, the Major Capital Investments (RIN 2132-AB02) “New Star ts” program. The New Starts program is the

### main source of discretionary Federal funding for co nstruction of rapid rail, light rail, commuter rail, and other forms of transit infrastructure. FTA also anticipates amending its regulations governing recipients’ management of major capital projects and its Bus Testing rule.

Maritime Administration (MARAD)

The Maritime Administration (MARAD) administers Federal laws and programs to promote and strengthen the U.S. merchant marine to meet the economic and security needs of the Nation. To that end, MARAD’s efforts are focused upon en suring a strong American presence in the domestic and international trades and to expanding maritime opportunities for American

businesses and workers.

MARAD’s regulatory objectives and prioriti es reflect the Agency’s responsibility for ensuring the availability of a U.S. merchant marine that can provide water transportation services for
American shippers and consumers and, in times of war or national emergency, for the U.S. armed forces. Major program areas include the following: Maritime Security, Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement, National Defense Reserve Fleet and the Ready Reserve Force, Maritime Guaranteed Loan Financing, United States Merchant Marine Academy, Mariner Education and Training Support, and Deepwater Po rt Licensing. Additionally, MARAD will continue its monitoring and enforcement of U.S. cargo preference laws and implementation of MARAD’s newest program, the “America’s Mari ne Highways Program.” To date, the Department has identified marine corridors, and grants have been awarded under the America’s Marine Highways Program.

MARAD’s primary regulatory activities in fiscal year 2012 will be to update existing cargo preference-related regulations, to continue the update of existing regulations as part of the Department’s Retrospective Regulatory Review effort, and to propose new regulations where
appropriate.

### Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) has responsibility for rulemaking under two programs. Through the As sociate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, PHMSA administers regulatory programs under Federal hazardous materials transportation law and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. Through the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, PHMSA administers regulatory programs under the Federal pipeline safety laws and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by t he Oil Pollution Act of 1990.

PHMSA will continue to work toward the re duction of deaths and injuries associated with the transportation of hazardous materials by all trans portation modes, including pipeline. We will concentrate on the prevention of high-risk incidents identified through the findings of the National Transportation Safety Board and PHMSA’s eval uation of transportation incident data. PHMSA will use all available Agency tools to assess data; evaluate alternative safe ty strategies, including regulatory strategies as necessary and appropriat e; target enforcement efforts; and enhance outreach, public education, and training to promote safety outcomes.

PHMSA will be considering whether changes are needed to the regulations covering hazardous liquid onshore pipelines. In particular, PHMSA is considering whether it should extend regulation to certain pipelines currently exempt from regulation; whether other areas along apipeline should either be identified for extra protection or be included as additional highconsequence areas (HCAs) for integrity management (IM) protection; whether to establish and/or adopt standards and procedures for minimum lead detection requirements for all pipelines; whether to require the installation of emergency fl ow restricting devices (E FRDs) in certain areas; whether revised valve spacing requirements are needed on new construction or existing pipelines; whether repair timeframes should be specified for pipeline segments in areas outside

### the HCAs that are assessed as part of the IM; and whether to establish and/or adopt standards and procedures for improving the methods of prev enting, detecting, assessing, and remediating stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in hazardous liquid pipeline systems.

Additionally, PHMSA will consider whether or not to revise the requirements in the pipeline safety regulations addressing integrity management principles for gas transmission pipelines. Specifically, PHMSA will be reviewing the defin ition of an HCA (including the concept of a potential impact radius), the repair criteria for both HCA and non-HCA areas, requiring the use of
automatic and remote-controlled shutoff valves, valve spacing, and whether applying the integrity management program requirements to additional areas would mitigate the need for class location
requirements.

Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA)

The Research and Innovative Technology Ad ministration (RITA) seeks to identify and facilitate solutions to the challenges and opportunities facing America’s transportation system through:

 Coordination, facilitation, and review of the Department's research and development programs and activities;

 Providing multi-modal expertise in transportation and logistics research, analysis, strategic planning, systems engineering and training;

 Advancement, and research and development, of innovative technologies, including intelligent transportation systems;

 Comprehensive transportation statis tics research, analysis, and reporting;

 Managing education and training in transportati on and national transportation-related fields;

and

 Managing the activities of the John A. Vol pe National Transportation Systems Center.

Through its Bureau of Transportation Statistics, O ffice of Airline Information, RITA collects,

### compiles, analyzes, and makes accessible information on the Nation's air transportation system. RITA collects airline financial, traffic, and operat ing statistical data, including on-time flight performance data that highlight long tarmac times an d chronically late flights. This information gives the Government consistent and comprehen sive economic and market data on airline operations that are used in supporting policy initiatives and administering the Department’s mandated aviation responsibilities, including negotiating international bilateral aviation agreements, awarding international route authorit ies, performing airline and industry status evaluations, supporting air service to small co mmunities, setting Alaskan Bush Mail rates, and meeting international treaty obligations.

Through its Intelligent Transportation System s Joint Program Office (ITS/JPO), RITA conducts
research and demonstrations and, as appropriate, may develop new regulations, in coordination with OST and other DOT operating administrations, to enable deployment of ITS research and technology results. This office collects and di sseminates benefits and costs information resulting from ITS-related research along with direct meas urement of the deployment of ITS nationwide. These efforts support market assessments for emerging market sectors that would be costprohibitive for industry to absorb alone. Such information is widely consumed by the community of stakeholders to determine their deployment needs.

The ITS Architecture and Standards Programs develop and maintain a National ITS Architecture; develop open, non-proprietary interf ace standards to facilitate rapid and economical adoption of nationally interoperable ITS technol ogies; and cooperate to harmonize ITS standards
internationally. These standards are incorporat ed into DOT operating administration regulatory
activities when appropriate.

Through its Volpe National Transportati on Systems Center, RITA provides a comprehensive range of engineering expertise, and qualitative and quantitative assessment services, focused on applying, maintaining, and increasing the technical body of knowledge to support DOT operating

### administration regulatory activities.

Through its Transportation Safety Institut e, RITA designs, develops, conducts, and evaluates training and technical assistance programs in tr ansportation safety and security to support DOT operating administration regulatory implementation and enforcement activities.

RITA’s regulatory priorities are to as sist OST and all DOT operating administrations in updating existing regulations by applying research, technology, and analytical results; to provide reliable information to transportation system decisionmakers; and to provide safety regulation implementation and enforcement training.

### QUANTIFIABLE COSTS AND BENEFITS OF RULEMAKINGS

ON THE 2011 to 2012 DOT REGULATORY PLAN (This chart does not account for non-quantifi able benefits, which are often substantial.)

Agency/RIN

Number Title Stage Quantifiable

Costs

Discounted
2007 $ (Millions) Quantifiable

Benefits

Discounted
2007 $ (Millions)

OST

2105-AD96 Accessibility of

Carrier Websites

and Ticket Kiosks FR (TBD) TBD TBD

2105-AE11 Enhancing Airline Passenger

Protections III SNPRM 08/12 TBD TBD

2105-AE12 Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) SNPRM 06/12 TBD TBD

Total for OST 0 0

FAA

### 2120-AJ00 Part 121, subparts

N and O FR (TBD) 222.9 199.1

2120-AJ53 Helicopter Safety

Initiatives and Misc

Amendments FR 07/12 225 275

2120-AJ86 SMS for part 121 FR 07/12 375.5 500.8

2120-AJ89 NY Congestion Management NPRM 05/12 TBD TBD

Total for FAA 823.4 974.9

FMCSA

2126-AA97 National Registry of

Certified Medical

Examiners FR 02/12 575 1,199

2126-AB11 Carrier Safety

Fitness

Determination NPRM 04/12 19 324

Total for FMCSA 594 1,523

NHTSA

2127-AK56 Seat Belts on

Motorcoaches FR 07/12 26.8 – 27.9 17.5 – 96.9

2127-AK79 CAFE 2017 and
Beyond FR (TBD) TBD TBD

### 2127-AK93 Sound for Hybrid

and Electric

Vehicles NPRM 07/12 TBD TBD

2127-AK96 Motorcoach

Rollover Structural Integrity NPRM 04/12 TBD TBD

2127-AK97 Electronic Stability Control Systems for
Heavy Vehicles NPRM 01/12 TBD TBD

Total for NHTSA 26.8 – 27.9 17.5 – 96.9

FTA

2132-AB02 Major Capital
Investment Projects NPRM 01/12 TBD TBD

Total for FTA 0 0

MARAD

2133-AB74 Cargo Preference 05/12 TBD TBD

Total for MARAD 0 0

TOTAL FOR DOT 1,444.2- 1,445.3 2,515.4- 2,594.8

Notes : Costs and benefits of rulemakings may be forecast over varying periods. Although the forecast periods will be the same for any given rulemaking, comparison s between proceedings

### should be made cautiously.

Costs and benefits are generally discounted at a 7 percent discount rate over the period analyzed.

The Department of Transportation genera lly assumes that there are economic benefits to avoiding a fatality of $6.2 million. That econom ic value is included as part of the benefits

estimates shown in the chart. As noted abov e, we have not included the non-quantifiable

benefits.The 17 Actions Described in the Regulatory Plan

Title Regulation Identifier Number Rulemaking Stage
Accessibility of Carrier Websites and Ticket Kiosks 2105-AD96 Proposed Rule Stage Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections III 2105-AE11 Proposed Rule Stage Carrier-Supplied Medical Oxygen, Accessible In-Flight Entertainment Systems, Service Animals, and Accessible Lavatories on Single-Aisle Aircraft 2105-AE12 Proposed Rule Stage
Qualification, Service, and Use of Crewmembers and Aircraft Dispatchers 2120-AJ00 Proposed Rule Stage
New York Congestion Management Rule for LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Newark Liberty International Airport 2120-AJ89 Proposed Rule Stage

Air Ambulance and Commercial Helicopter Operations; Safety Initiatives and Miscellaneous Amendments 2120-AJ53 Final Rule Stage
Safety Management Systems for Certificate Holders 2120-AJ86 Final Rule Stage Carrier Safety Fitness Determination 2126-AB11 Proposed Rule Stage National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners 2126-AA97 Final Rule Stage
Electronic On -Board Recorders and Hours of Service Supporting Documents 2126-AB20 Long-term Action Stage Passenger Car and Light Truck Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards MYs 2017 and Beyond 2127-AK79 Proposed Rule Stage

Sound for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles 2127-AK93 Proposed Rule Stage
Motorcoach Rollover Structural Integrity 2127-AK96 Proposed Rule Stage Electronic Stability Control Systems for Heavy Vehicles 2127-AK97 Proposed Rule Stage Require Installation of Seat Belts on Motorcoaches, FMVSS No. 208 2127-AK56 Final Rule Stage Major Capital Investment Projects (RRR) 2132-AB02 Proposed Rule Stage Regulations To Be Followed by All Departments, Agencies, and Shippers Having Responsibility To Provide a Preference for U.S.-Flag Vessels in the Shipment of Cargoes on Ocean Vessels 2133-AB74 Proposed Rule Stage

Department of Transportation (DOT) Office of the Secretary ( OST ) RIN: 2105-AD96

View Related Documents

Title: Accessibility of Carrier Websites and Ticket Kiosks Abstract: This rulemaking was divided into two successive Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) rulemakings. This one, as well as the second rulemaking (2105-AE12), address issues raised in another rulemaking RIN 2105-AD92. This rulemaking would consider: (1) The cost and technical issues involved in requiring carrier website accessibility and (2) whether automated kiosks operated by carriers at airports and elsewhere should be required to be accessible. After the public comment periods, we intend to consolidate the final decisions in this rulemaking and RIN 2105-AE12 into one document.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 14 CFR 382 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 41702; 49 USC 47105; 49 USC 41712 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: This rulemaking proposes to provide greater accommodations for individuals with disabilities in accessing automated kiosks at U.S. airports and Web sites operated by U.S. and foreign air carriers and their ticket agents. Automated kiosks are widely used by U.S. and foreign air carriers at airports to provide customer services (e.g., boarding pass and bag tag printing). Also, today's passengers increasingly rely on air travel Web sites for information about airline services, making reservations, and obtaining discounted airfares. Currently, neither airlines nor airports are required to make airport kiosks accessible to passengers with disabilities. Also, not all air travel information and services available to the public on Web sites are accessible to people with disabilities. Only DOT can protect air travelers with disabilities as states are preempted fromregulating in these areas and no private right of action exists for airline consumers to enforce the Air Carrier Access Act.
Legal Basis: The legal basis for the proposed rule is the Air Carrier Access Act, which prohibits discrimination in airline service on the basis of disability, and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which requires accessibility in airport terminal facilities that receive Federal financial assistance.

Alternatives: Since May 2008, the Department has attempted to address the problem of inaccessible Web sites by requiring U.S. and foreign air carriers to make discounted, Web-based fares and amenities available to passengers who self-identify as being unable to use an airline's inaccessible Web site due to their disability. The Department has also tried to address the problem of inaccessible kiosks by requiring U.S. and foreign air carriers to make equivalent service available to passengers with a disability who cannot readily use a carrier's automated kiosk due to their disability. Disability advocacy groups have repeatedly expressed opposition to these interim solutions as they do not enable them to independently access and use airlines' Web sites or kiosks.

Costs and Benefits: Preliminary estimates show that the present value of net benefits of the requirement to ensure the accessibility of automated airport kiosks to be $70.4 million over the 10-year period from 2013 through 2022, using a 7 percent discount rate. With respect to the proposed requirements to ensure air travel Web site accessibility, our preliminary regulatory evaluation estimates the expected present value of net benefits at $48.5 million over the period from 2013 through 2022, using the 7 percent discount rate.

Risks: N/A Timetable: Action Date FR Cite SNPRM 09/26/2011 76 FR 59307 Extension of Comment Period and Clarification of Proposed Rule 11/21/2011 76 FR 71914 SNPRM Comment Period End 11/25/2011 Supplemental NPRM Comment Period End 01/09/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: Business Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Related RINs: Related to 2105 -AE12 Agency Contact: Robert C. Ashby Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Regulation and Enforcement Department of Transportation Office of the Secretary Room W94-302 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -4723 TDD Phone: 202 755 -7687 E-Mail: bob.ashby@ost.dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) Office of the Secretary ( OST ) RIN: 2105-AE11

View Related Documents

Title: Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections III Abstract: This rulemaking would address the following issues: (1) Whether the Department should require a marketing carrier to provide assistance to its code-share partner when a flight operated by the code-share partner experiences a lengthy tarmacdelay; (2) whether the Department should enhance disclosure requirements on code-share operations, including requiring ontime performance data, reporting of certain data code-share operations, and codifying the statutory amendment of 49 U.S.C.41712(c) regarding website schedule disclosure of code-share operations; (3) whether the Department should expand the ontime performance "reporting carrier" pool to include smaller carriers; (4) whether the Department should require travel agents to adopt minimum customer service standards in relation to the sale of air transportation; (5) whether the Department should require ticket agents to disclose the carriers whose tickets they sell or do not sell and information regarding any incentive payments they receive in connection with the sale of air transportation; (6) whether the Department should require ticket agents to disclose any preferential display of individual fares or carriers in the ticket agent's Internet displays; (7) whether the Department should require additional or special disclosures regarding certain substantial fees; e.g., oversize or overweight baggage fees; (8) whether the Department should prohibit post-purchase price increase for all services and products not purchased with the ticket or whether it is sufficient to prohibit post-purchase prices increases for baggage charges thattraditionally have been included in the ticket price; and (9) whether the Department should require that ancillary fees be displayed through all sale channels.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 14 CFR 244; 14 CFR 250; 14 CFR 253; 14 CFR 259; 14 CFR 399 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 41712; 49 USC 40101;49 USC 41702 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: On April 25, 2011, the Department of Transportation published in the Federal Register a final rule on Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections (76 FR 23110). Among other requirements, the rule contains several requirements for U.S. and foreign air carriers, ticket agents, and other sellers of air transportation to disclose to consumers the cost of certain ancillary services. The rule requires disclosure through various methods. One issue the rulemaking requested comment on was whether the Department should require information regarding the cost of airline ancillary services to be displayed through Global Distribution Systems in order to enhance transparency of such fees to consumers. Because the Department lacked critical information on the issue, the Department deferred the issue to this rulemaking. This rulemaking will address that issue as well as several other airline consumer protection proposals.
Legal Basis: The Department has authority and responsibility under 49 U.S.C. section 41712, in concert with 49 U.S.C. 40101 and 49 U.S.C. section 41702, to protect consumers from unfair and deceptive practices and to ensure safe and adequate service in air transportation.

Alternatives: One alternative would be to take no regulatory action. Also, various regulatory alternatives will be developed and the public will be afforded an opportunity to provide comments when the Department publishes the proposed rule in the Federal Register.

Costs and Benefits: TBD

Risks: The risk of not taking regulatory action would be the continuation of a system where passengers cannot determine the true cost of their air travel. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite Supplemental NPRM 08/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Business Government Levels Affected: Undetermined Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Related RINs: Related to 2105 -AD72; Related to 2105- AD92 Agency Contact: Blane A. Workie Attorney Department of Transportation Office of the Secretary 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -9342 TDD Phone: 202 755 -7687 FAX: 202 366 -7152 E-Mail: blane.workie@ost.dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) Office of the Secretary ( OST ) RIN: 2105-AE12

View Related Documents

Title: Carrier-Supplied Medical Oxygen, Accessible In-Flight Entertainment Systems, Service Animals, and Accessible Lavatories on Single-Aisle AircraftAbstract: This rulemaking is the one of two successive Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) rulemakings that address issues raised in another rulemaking: RIN 2105-AD92. The second rulemaking is RIN 2105-AD96. This rulemaking action would consider (1) whether there are safety-related reasons for excluding service animals other than dogs that may be specific to foreign carriers; (2) whether the cost of requiring carriers to supply free in-flight medical oxygen would create an undue burden; and (3) whether providing high-contrast captioning on in-flight entertainment displays is technically and economically feasible. It would also address accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft and a rulemaking petition from the Psychiatric Service Dog Society to eliminate provisions allowing carriers to require documentation and 48 hours advance notice for users of psychiatric service animals, and miscellaneous service animal issues. After the public comment periods, we intend to consolidate the final decisions in this rulemaking and RIN 2105-AD96 into one document.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 14 CFR 382 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 41702; 49 USC 41712; 49 USC 47105 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: This rulemaking action would examine whether the Department should require carriers to provide inflight medical oxygen, captioning on in-flight entertainment (IFE) systems, and accessible lavatories on single-aisle aircraft to provide individuals with disabilities greater access to air travel. Currently, few airlines make in-flight medical oxygen available to passengers and as a result individuals who are dependent on medical oxygen but cannot use portable oxygen concentrators are having difficulty traveling by air. Also, passengers who are deaf or hard-of-hearing have strongly advocated for captioning of IFE systems, arguing that the in-flight entertainment that is available to other passengers should also be available to them. Lavatories on single-aisle aircraft have also become a matter of interest to the Department as more and more single-aisle aircraft are used for longer flights and the absence of accessible lavatories makes travel difficult for passengers with disabilities. This rulemaking action will also address whether to amend the existing regulation, which allows airlines to require users of psychiatric and emotional support service animals to provide documentation and advance notice of their planned travel with a service animal. An advocacy group representing users of psychiatric service dogs has filed a petition for rulemaking stating that the notice and medical documentation requirements stigmatize and discriminate against people with mental disabilities, and asking that it be repealed.
Legal Basis: This legal basis for the proposed rule is the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), which prohibits discrimination in airline service on the basis of disability.

Alternatives: Regulatory alternatives will be developed and the public will be afforded an opportunity to provide comments when the Department publishes the proposed rule in the Federal Register.

Costs and Benefits: Estimates of costs and benefits are under development.

Risks: N/A Timetable: Action Date FR Cite Supplemental NPRM 06/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: Business Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Related RINs: Split From 2105 -AD96 Agency Contact: Robert C. Ashby Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Regulation and Enforcement Department of Transportation Office of the Secretary Room W94-302 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -4723 TDD Phone: 202 755 -7687 E-Mail: bob.ashby@ost.dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT)Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA ) RIN: 2120-AJ00

View Related Documents

Title: Qualification, Service, and Use of Crewmembers and Aircraft Dispatchers Abstract: This rulemaking would amend the regulations for crewmember and dispatcher training programs in domestic, flag, and supplemental operations. The rulemaking would enhance traditional training programs by requiring the use of flight simulation training devices for flight crewmembers and including additional training requirements in areas that are critical to safety. The rulemaking would also reorganize and revise the qualification and training requirements. The changes are intended to contribute to reducing aviation accidents.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 14 CFR 119; 14 CFR 121; 14 CFR 135; 14 CFR 142; 14 CFR 65 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 106(g); 49 USC 40113; 49 USC 40119; 49 USC 44101; 49 USC 44701; 49 USC 44702; 49 USC 44705; 49 USC 44709 to 44711; 49 USC 44713; 49 USC 44716; 49 USC 44717; 49 USC 44722; 49 USC 44901; 49 USC 44903; 49 USC 44904; 49 USC 44912; 49 USC 46105 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: This rulemaking is part of the FAA's efforts to reduce fatal accidents in which human error was a major contributing cause. The changes would reduce human error and improve performance among flight crewmembers, flight attendants, and aircraft dispatchers. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigations identified several areas of inadequate training that were the probable cause of an accident. This rulemaking contains changes to address the causes and factors identified by the NTSB.
Legal Basis: The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in title 49 of the United States Code. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), which requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations and minimum standards for other practices, methods, and procedures necessary for safety in air commerce and national security.

Alternatives: During the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) phase, the FAA did not find any significant alternatives in accordance with 5 U.S.C. section 603(d). The FAA will again review alternatives at the final rule phase.

Costs and Benefits: The FAA is developing the costs and benefits of this rulemaking

Risks: The FAA will review specific risks associated with this rulemaking. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 01/12/2009 74 FR 1280 Proposed Rule; Notice of Public Meeting 03/12/2009 74 FR 10689 NPRM Comment Period Extended 04/20/2009 74 FR 17910 NPRM Comment Period End 05/12/2009 Extended NPRM Comment Period End 08/10/2009 Supplemental NPRM 05/20/2011 76 FR 29336 Supplemental NPRM Comment Period Extended 06/23/2011 76 FR 36888 Supplemental NPRM Comment Period End 07/19/2011 Extended Supplemental NPRM Comment Period End 09/19/2011 Analyzing Comments 01/00/2012

Additional Information: For flight crewmember information contact James K. Sheppard, for flight attendant information contact Nancy Lauck Claussen, and for aircraft dispatcher information contact Leo Hollis, Air Carrier Training Branch (AFS-210), Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267 8166.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Business Government Levels Affected: No Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Agency Contact: Nancy L. Claussen Federal Aviation Administration Department of TransportationFederal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue SW Washington , DC 20591 Phone: 202 267 -8166 E- Mail: nancy.claussen@faa.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA ) RIN: 2120-AJ89

View Related Documents

Title: New York Congestion Management Rule for LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Newark Liberty International Airport Abstract: This rulemaking would replace the current temporary orders limiting scheduled operations at LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Newark Liberty International Airport with a more permanent rule to address the issues of congestion and delay at the New York area ́s three major commercial airports, while also promoting fair access and competition. The rulemaking would help ensure that congestion and delays are managed by limiting scheduled and unscheduled operations. The rulemaking would also establish a secondary market for U.S. and foreign air carriers to buy, sell, trade, and lease slots amongst each other at each of the three airports. This would allow carriers serving or seeking to serve the New York area airports to exchange slots as their business models and strategic goals require.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 14 CFR 93 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 106(g); 49 USC 40103; 49 USC 40106; 49 USC 40109; 49 USC 40113; 49 USC 44502; 49 USC 44514; 49 USC 44701; 49 USC 44719; 49 USC 46301 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: This rulemaking would replace the current temporary orders limiting scheduled operations at LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Newark Liberty International Airport with a more permanent rule to address the issues of congestion and delay at the New York area's three major commercial airports, while also promoting fair access and competition. The rulemaking would help ensure that congestion and delays are managed by limiting scheduled and unscheduled operations. The rulemaking would also establish a secondary market for U.S. and foreign air carriers to buy, sell, trade, and lease slots amongst each other at each of the three airports. This would allow carriers serving or seeking to serve the New York area airports to exchange slots as their business models and strategic goals require.
Legal Basis: This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart I, sections 40101, 40103, 40105, and 41712. The Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) is the head of the DOT and has broad oversight of significant FAA decisions. See 49 U.S.C. 102 and 106. In addition, under 49 U.S.C. 41712, the Secretary has the authority to investigate and prohibit unfair and deceptive practices and unfair methods of competition in air transportation or the sale of air transportation. The FAA has broad authority under 49 U.S.C. 40103 to regulate the use of the navigable airspace of the United States. This section authorizes the FAA to develop plans and policy for the use of navigable airspace and to assign the use the FAA deems necessary for safe and efficient utilization. It further directs the FAA to prescribe air traffic rules and regulations governing the efficient utilization of navigable airspace. Not only is the FAA required to ensure the efficient use of navigable airspace, but it must do so in a manner that does not effectively shut out potential operators at the airport and in a manner that acknowledges competitive market forces. These authorities empower the DOT to ensure the efficient utilization of airspace by limiting the number of scheduled and unscheduled aircraft operations at JFK, EWR, and LGA, while balancing between promoting competition and recognizing historical investments in the airport and the need to provide continuity. They also authorize the DOT to investigate the transfer of slots and to limit or prohibit anti-competitive transfers.

Alternatives: The FAA considered two alternatives. The first alternative was to simply extend the existing orders. This alternative was rejected because the FAA wanted to increase competition by making slots available to more operators. The FAA believes these operators are likely to be small entities. The second alternative was to remove the existing orders. This alternative results in unacceptable delay costs from the increase in operations.

Costs and Benefits: TBD

Risks: The FAA will review specific risks associated with this rulemaking. Timetable: Action Date FR CiteNPRM 05/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: Business Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Agency Contact: Molly W. Smith Federal Aviation Administration Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue SW Washington , DC 20591 Phone: 202 267 -3344 E- Mail: molly.w.smith@faa.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA ) RIN: 2120-AJ53

View Related Documents

Title: Air Ambulance and Commercial Helicopter Operations; Safety Initiatives and Miscellaneous Amendments Abstract: This rulemaking would change equipment and operating requirements for commercial helicopter operations, including many specifically for helicopter air ambulance operations. This rulemaking is necessary to increase crew, passenger, and patient safety. The intended effect is to implement National Transportation Safety Board, Aviation Rulemaking Committee, and internal FAA recommendations.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Final Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 14 CFR 1; 14 CFR 135; 14 CFR 91 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 106(g); 49 USC 1155; 49 USC 40101 to 40103; 49 USC 40120; 49 USC 41706; 49 USC 41721; 49 USC 44101; 49 USC 44106; 49 USC 44111; 49 USC 46306; 49 USC 46315; 49 USC 46316; 49 USC 46504; 49 USC 46506; 49 USC 46507; 49 USC 47122; 49 USC 47508; 49 USC 47528 to 47531 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: Since 2002, there has been an increase in fatal helicopter air ambulance accidents. The FAA has undertaken initiatives to address common factors that contribute to helicopter air ambulance accidents, including issuing notices, handbook bulletins, operations specifications, and advisory circulars (ACs). This rule would codify many of those initiatives, as well as several NTSB and part 125/135 Aviation Rulemaking Committee recommendations. In addition, the House of Representatives and the Senate introduced legislation in the 111th Congress and in earlier sessions that would address several of the issues raised in this rulemaking.
Legal Basis: This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(4), which requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations in the interest of safety for the maximum hours or periods of service of airmen and other employees of air carriers, and 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), which requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations and minimum standards for other practices, methods, and procedures necessary for safety in air commerce and national security.

Alternatives: Alternative One: The alternative would change the compliance date from 3 years to 4 years after the effective rule date to install all required pieces of equipment. This would help small business owners cope with the burden of the expenses because they would be able to integrate these pieces of equipment over a longer period of time. This alternative is not preferred because it would delay safety enhancements. Alternative Two: The alternative would exclude the HTAWS unit from this proposal. Although this alternative would reduce annualized costs to small air ambulance operators by approximately 12 percent and the ratio of annualized cost to annual revenue would decrease from a range of between 1.76 percent and 1.88 percent to a range of between 1.55 percent and 1.65 percent, the annualized cost would still be significant for all 35 small air ambulance operators. The alternative not only does not eliminate the problem for a substantial number of small entities, but also would reduce safety. The HTAWS is an outstanding tool for situational awareness in all aspects of flying, including day, night, and instrument meteorological conditions. Therefore the FAA believes that this equipment is a significant enhancement for safety. Alternative Three: The alternative would increase the requirement of certificate holders from 10 to 15 helicopters or more that are engaged in helicopter air ambulance operations to have an Operations Control Center. The FAA believes that operators with 10 or more helicopters engaged in air ambulance operations would cover 66 percent of the total population of the air ambulance fleet in the U.S. The FAA believes that operators with 15 or more helicopters would decrease the coverage of thepopulation to 50 percent. Furthermore, complexity issues arise and considerably increase with operators of more than 10 helicopters. All alternatives above are not considered to be acceptable by the FAA in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 603(c).

Costs and Benefits: The FAA is currently developing costs and benefits.

Risks: Helicopter air ambulance operations have several characteristics that make them unique, including that they are not limited to airport locations for picking up and dropping off patients, but may pick up a person at a roadside accident scene and transport him or her directly to a hospital. Helicopter air ambulance operations are also often time-sensitive. A helicopter air ambulance flight may be crucial to getting a donor organ or critically ill or injured patient to a medical facility as efficiently as possible. Additionally, patients generally are not able to choose the helicopter air ambulance company that provides them with transportation. Despite the fact that there are unique aspects to helicopter air ambulance operations, they remain, at their core, air transportation. Accordingly, the FAA has the responsibility for ensuring the safety of these operations. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 10/12/2010 75 FR 62640 NPRM Comment Period End 01/10/2011 Final Rule 07/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Business Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: No Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Agency Contact: Alberta Brown Air Transportation Division Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue SW Washington , DC 20591 Phone: 202 267 -8321

Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA ) RIN: 2120-AJ86

View Related Documents

Title: Safety Management Systems for Certificate Holders Abstract: This rulemaking would require each certificate holder operating under 14 CFR part 121 to develop and implement aSafety Management System (SMS) to improve the safety of its aviation related activities. A SMS is a comprehensive, processoriented approach to managing safety throughout an organization. An SMS includes an organization-wide safety policy; formal methods for identifying hazards, controlling, and continually assessing risk and safety performance; and promotion of a safety culture. SMS stresses not only compliance with technical standards but increased emphasis on the overall safety performance of the organization.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Final Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 14 CFR 121 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 106(g); 49 USC 40113; 49 USC 40119; 49 USC 41706; 49 USC 44101; 49 USC 44701; 49 USC 44702; 49 USC 44705; 49 USC 44709 to 44711; 49 USC 44713; 49 USC 44716; 49 USC 44717; 49 USC 44722; 49 USC 46105 Legal Deadline: Congress passed Public Law 111-216 that instructs FAA to conduct a rulemaking to require all part 121 air carriers to implement a Safety Management System (SMS). This act further states that FAA shall consider at a minimum each of the following as part of the SMS rulemaking: (1) An Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP); (2) a Flight Operations Quality Assurance Program (FOQA); (3) a Line Operations Safety Audit (LOSA); and (4) an Advance Qualifications Program. Action Source Description Date NPRM Statutory 10/29/2010 Other Statutory Final Rule 07/30/2012

Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: Passage of the Airline Safety and FAA Extension Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-216), section 215 "Safety Management System" directs the Administrator to conduct a rulemaking to require all part 121 air carriers to implement a safetymanagement system (SMS). The Act requires an NPRM within 90 days and a final rule not later than 24 months from enactment of Public Law 111-216.
Legal Basis: Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-216), section 215, signed by President on August 1, 2010.

Alternatives: The Rulemaking Team considered including parts 135 (air carriers) and 145 (repair stations) to the rule but did not because of time restraints.

Costs and Benefits: Costs and benefits of this final rule are still in development. An initial cost estimate for SMS implementation over 3 years is $270,000 (small carrier), $373,950 (medium carrier), and $1,135,500 (large carrier) with total cost for 90 part 121 carriers of $52,276,200. However, given the flexibility of SMS, and expected safety improvements, benefits are expected to exceed costs.

Risks: Commercial air carrier accident rate in the U.S. has remained relatively constant over the past 10 years. However, the recent trend of hazards include many that could have been mitigated or eliminated had a structured, organization-wide approach to managing air carriers' operations been in place. SMS is a comprehensive, process-oriented approach to managing safety throughout an organization, and stresses not only compliance with technical standards but increased emphasis on the overall safety performance of the organization. The potential reduction of risks would be averted causalities, aircraft damage, and accident investigation costs by identifying safety issues and spotting trends before they result in a near-miss, incident, or accident. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 11/05/2010 75 FR 68224 NPRM Comment Period Extended 01/31/2011 76 FR 5296 NPRM Comment Period End 02/03/2011 Extended NPRM Comment Period End 03/07/2011 Final Rule 07/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Business Government Levels Affected: Federal Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Related RINs: Split From 2120 -AJ15 Agency Contact: Scott VanBuren Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue SW Washington , DC 20591 Phone: 202 494 -8417 E- Mail: scott.vanburen@faa.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration ( FMCSA ) RIN: 2126-AB11

View Related Documents

Title: Carrier Safety Fitness Determination Abstract: This rulemaking would revise 49 CFR part 385, Safety Fitness Procedures, in accordance with the Agency ́s major new initiative, Comprehensive Safety Analysis (CSA). CSA is a new operational model FMCSA plans to implement that is designed to help the Agency carry out its compliance and enforcement programs more efficiently and effectively. Currently, the safety fitness rating of a motor carrier is determined based on the results of a very labor intensive compliance review conducted at the carrier ́s place of business. Aside from roadside inspections and new audits, the compliance review is the Agency ́s primary intervention. Under CSA, FMCSA would propose to implement a broader array of progressive interventions, some of which allow FMCSA to make contact with more carriers. Through this rulemaking FMCSA would establish safety fitness determinations based on safety data from crashes, inspections, and violation history rather than just the standard compliance review. This will enable the Agency to assess the safety performance of a greater segment of the motor carrier industry with the goal of further reducing large truck and bus crashes and fatalities.
Priority: Economically Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: Yes Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined CFR Citation: 49 CFR 385 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations )Legal Authority: Sec 4009 of TEA-21 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: Because of the time and expense associated with the on-site compliance review, only a small fraction of carriers (approximately 12,000) receive a safety fitness determination each year. Since the current safety fitness determination process is based exclusively on the results of an on-site compliance review, the great majority of carriers subject to FMCSA jurisdiction do not receive a timely determination of their safety fitness. The proposed methodology for determining motor carrier safety fitness should correct the deficiencies of the current process. In correcting these deficiencies, FMCSA has made a concerted effort to develop a "transparent" method for the Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) that would allow each motor carrier to understand fully how FMCSA established that carrier's specific SFD.
Legal Basis: This rule is based primarily on the authority of 49 U.S.C. 31144, which directs the Secretary of Transportation to "determine whether an owner or operator is fit to operate a commercial motor vehicle" and to "maintain by regulation a procedure for determining the safety fitness of an owner or operator." This statute was first enacted as part of the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984, section 215, Public Law 98-554, 98 Stat. 2844 (Oct. 30, 1984). The proposed rule also relies on the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 31133, which gives the Secretary "broad administrative powers to assist in the implementation" of the provisions of the Motor Carrier Safety Act now found in chapter 311 of title 49, U.S.C. These powers include, among others, authority to conduct inspections and investigations, compile statistics, require production of records and property, prescribe recordkeeping and reporting requirements and to perform other acts considered appropriate. These powers are used to obtain the data used by the Safety Management System and by the proposed new methodology for safety fitness determinations. Under 49 CFR 1.73(g), the Secretary has delegated the authority to carry out the functions in subchapters I, III, and IV of chapter 311, title 49, U.S.C., to the FMCSA Administrator. Sections 31133 and 31144 are part of subchapter III of chapter 311.

Alternatives: The Agency has been considering only two alternatives: The no-action alternative and the proposal.

Costs and Benefits: The Agency has estimated the crash-reduction benefit from the change to the proposed safety fitness determination process to be about $441 million annually. The total cost is estimated at $13 million annually. Net benefits are about $428 million annually.

Risks: A risk of incorrectly identifying a compliant carrier as non-compliant -- and consequently subjecting the carrier to unnecessary expenses -- has been analyzed and has been found to be negligible under the process being proposed. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 04/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Small Entities Affected: Business Federalism: Undetermined Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Agency Contact: David Miller Regulatory Development Division Department of Transportation Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -5370 E- Mail: fmcsaregs@dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration ( FMCSA ) RIN: 2126-AA97

View Related Documents

Title: National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners Abstract: This rulemaking would establish training, testing, and certification standards for medical examiners responsible for certifying that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers meet established physical qualifications standards; provide a database (or National Registry) of medical examiners that meet the prescribed standards for use by motor carriers, drivers, and Federal and State enforcement personnel in determining whether a medical examiner is qualified to conduct examinations of interstate truck and bus drivers; and require medical examiners to transmit electronically to FMCSA the name of the driver anda numerical identifier for each driver that is examined. The rulemaking would also establish the process by which medical examiners that fail to meet or maintain the minimum standards would be removed from the National Registry. This action is inresponse to section 4116 of Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEALU).
Priority: Economically Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Final Rule Major: Yes Unfunded Mandates: Private Sector CFR Citation: 49 CFR 390; 49 CFR 391 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: PL 109- 59 (2005), sec 4116 Legal Deadline: Action Source Description Date Other Statutory 08/10/2006

Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: In enacting the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59, Aug. 10, 2005), Congress recognized the need to improve the quality of the medical certification of drivers. SAFETEA-LU addresses the requirement for medical examiners to receive training in physical examination standards and be listed on a national registry of medical examiners as one step toward improving the quality of the commercial motor vehicle (CMV) driver physical examination process and the medical fitness of CMV drivers to operate CMVs. The safety impact will result from ensuring that medical examiners have completed training and testing to demonstrate that they fully understand FMCSA's physical qualifications standards and are capable of applying those standards consistently, thereby decreasing the likelihood that a medically unqualified driver may obtain a medical certificate.
Legal Basis: The fundamental legal basis for the National Registry program comes from 49 U.S.C. 31149(d), which requires FMCSA to establish and maintain a current national registry of medical examiners that are qualified to perform examinations of CMV drivers and to issue medical certificates. FMCSA is required to remove from the registry any medical examiner who fails to meet or maintain qualifications established by FMCSA. In addition, in developing its regulations, FMCSA must consider both the effect of driver health on the safety of CMV operations and the effect of such operations on driver health, 49 U.S.C. 31136(a).

Alternatives: The rulemaking is statutorily mandated. Thus, the Agency must establish the National Registry.

Costs and Benefits: We estimated 10-year costs (discounted at 7 percent) at $700,783 million, total benefits at $1,144,961 million, and net benefits over 10 years at $444,177 million.

Risks: FMCSA has not yet fully assessed the risks that might be associated with this activity. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 12/01/2008 73 FR 73129 NPRM Comment Period End 01/30/2009 Final Rule 02/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: No Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Agency Contact: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels Director, Office of Medical Programs Department of Transportation Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -4001 E- Mail: maggi.gunnels@dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration ( FMCSA ) RIN: 2126-AB20

View Related Documents

Title: Electronic On- Board Recorders and Hours of Service Supporting DocumentsAbstract: This rulemaking will consider revisions to RIN 2126-AA89 (Electronic On-Board Recorders for Hours of Service Drivers) to expand the number of motor carriers required to install and operate Electronic On-Board Recorders (EOBRs). FMCSA is consolidating this follow-up to the EOBR rule with the Hours Of Service Of Drivers: Supporting Documents rulemaking for development of a single NPRM in RIN 2126-AB20. In addressing Hours of Service Supporting Documents requirements in this new rulemaking, FMCSA will consider reducing or eliminating current paperwork burdens associated with supporting documents in favor of expanded EOBR use. On January 15, 2010, the American Trucking Associations (ATA) filed a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Cir. No. 10- 1009). ATA petitioned the court to direct FMCSA to issue an NPRM on supporting documents in conformance with the requirements set forth in section 113 of the HMTAA within 60 days after the issuance of the writ and a final rule no later than 6 months after the issuance of the NPRM. The court granted the petition for writ of mandamus on September 30, 2010, ordering FMCSA to issue an NPRM on the supporting document regulations by December 30, 2010. At the request of the agency, the DC Circuit extended the deadline to January 31, 2011.
Priority: Economically Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Long-term Action Major: Yes Unfunded Mandates: Private Sector CFR Citation: 49 CFR 350; 49 CFR 385; 49 CFR 396; 49 CFR 395 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 31502; 31136(a); PL 103.311; 49 USC 31137(a) Legal Deadline: Action Source Description Date NPRM Judicial 01/31/2011

Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: This rulemaking would improve safety on the Nation's highways by increasing compliance with the Hours of Service regulations. This rulemaking would require the use of Electronic On-Board Recorders by an expanded population, and would clarify and specify requirements related to supporting documents.
Legal Basis: Section 31502 of title 49 of the United States Code provides that "[t]he Secretary of Transportation may prescribe requirements for: (1) Qualifications and maximum hours of service of employees of, and safety of operation and equipment of, a motor carrier; and (2) qualifications and maximum hours of service of employees of, and standards of equipment of, a motor private carrier, when needed to promote safety of operation." This rulemaking addresses "safety of operation and equipment" of motor carriers and "standards of equipment" of motor private carriers and, as such, is well within the authority of 49 U.S.C. 31502. The rulemaking would allow motor carriers to use EOBRs to document drivers' compliance with the HOS requirements; require some noncompliant carriers to install, use, and maintain EOBRs for this purpose; and update existing performance standards for on-board recording devices. Section 31136 of title 49 of the United States Code provides concurrent authority to regulate drivers, motor carriers, and vehicle equipment. It requires the Secretary to "prescribe regulations on commercial motor vehicle safety. The regulations shall prescribe minimum safety standards for commercial motor vehicles. At a minimum, the regulations shall ensure that: (1) Commercial motor vehicles are maintained, equipped, loaded, and operated safely; (2) the responsibilities imposed on operators of commercial motor vehicles do not impair their ability to operate the vehicles safely; (3) the physical condition of operators of commercial motor vehicles is adequate to enable them to operate the vehicles safely; and (4) the operation of commercial motor vehicles does not have a deleterious effect on the physical condition of the operators."

Alternatives: To be determined.

Costs and Benefits: FMCSA has not yet fully assessed the costs and benefits that might be associated with this activity.

Risks: FMCSA has not yet fully assessed the risks that might be associated with this activity. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite Next Action Undetermined NPRM 02/01/2011 76 FR 5537 NPRM Comment Period End 02/28/2011 NPRM Comment Period Extended 03/10/2011 76 FR 13121 Extended NPRM Comment Period End 05/23/2011

Additional Information: The Agency previously published an NPRM on this subject under RIN 2126-AA76, "Hours of Service of Drivers; Supporting Documents" (63 FR 19457, Apr. 20, 1998) and an SNPRM, "Hours of Service of Drivers: Supporting Documents" (69 FR 63997, Nov. 3, 2004). The Agency withdrew the SNPRM on October 25, 2007, 72 FR 60614. The previous proceeding can be found in docket No. FMCSA-1998-3706.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Business Government Levels Affected: No Federalism: NoEnergy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Related RINs: Related to 2126 -AA89; Related to 2126- AA76 Agency Contact: Deborah M. Freund Senior Transportation Specialist Department of Transportation Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -5370 E- Mail: deborah.freund@dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA ) RIN: 2127-AK79

View Related Documents

Title: Passenger Car and Light Truck Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards MYs 2017 and Beyond Abstract: This rulemaking would establish Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for light trucks and passenger cars for model years 2017 and beyond. This rulemaking would respond to requirements of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The statute requires that CAFE standards be prescribed separately for passenger automobiles and non-passenger automobiles to achieve a combined fleet fuel economy of at least 35 mpg by model year 2020. For model years 2021 and beyond, the statute requires that the average fuel economy required to be attained by each fleet of passenger and non-passenger automobiles be the maximum feasible for each model year. The law requires the standards be set at least 18 months prior to the start of the model year. On May 21, 2010, President Obama issued a memorandum directing NHTSA and EPA to conduct a joint rulemaking (NHTSA regulating fuel economy and EPA regulating greenhouse gas emissions), and to issue a Notice of Intent to Issue a Proposed Rule (NOI) by September 30, 2010.
Priority: Economically Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: Yes Unfunded Mandates: Private Sector CFR Citation: 49 CFR 533 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 32902; Delegation of Authority at 49 CFR 1.50 Legal Deadline: Action Source Description Date Other Statutory 04/01/2015

Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: This rulemaking would respond to requirements of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. The statute requires that corporate average fuel economy standards be prescribed separately for passenger automobiles and non-passenger automobiles to achieve a combined fleet fuel economy of at least 35 mpg by model year 2020. For model years 2021 and beyond, the statute requires that the average fuel economy required to be attained by each fleet of passenger and non-passenger automobiles be the maximum feasible for each model year. The law requires the standards be set at least 18 months prior to the start of the model year, and for model year 2017, standards must be set by April 1, 2015. On May 21, 2010, President Obama issued a memorandum directing NHTSA and EPA to conduct joint rulemaking, with NHTSA regulating fuel economy and EPA regulating greenhouse gas emissions.
Legal Basis: Section 32910(d) of title 49 of the United States Code provides that the Administrator may prescribe regulations necessary to carry out his duties under chapter 329, Automobile Fuel Economy.

Alternatives: The Agency is not pursuing any alternatives.

Costs and Benefits: The costs and benefits of the potential changes addressed in this action have not yet been assessed.

Risks: Depending upon how manufacturers use weight reduction to meet the fuel economy standards, there is a potential impact on motor vehicle safety. The 2010 NHTSA analysis shows that a 100-pound reduction in weight, while keeping footprint constant, decreases the fatality rate for light trucks over 3,870 pounds but increases the fatality rate for light trucks less than 3,870 pounds and for all passenger cars. An interagency team from DOT, EPA, and DOE are further examining this issue. Timetable: Action Date FR CiteNotice of Intent (NOI) 10/13/2010 75 FR 62739 NOI Comment Period End 10/31/2010 Supplemental NOI 12/08/2010 75 FR 76337 NPRM 12/01/2011 76 FR 74854 NPRM Comment Period End 01/30/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined Government Levels Affected: No
Small Entities Affected: No Federalism: No Energy Affected: Yes International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of international interest. RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Related RINs: Duplicate of 2060 -AQ54 Agency Contact: James Tamm Fuel Economy Division Chief Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 493 -0515 E- Mail: james.tamm@dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA ) RIN: 2127-AK93

View Related Documents

Title: Sound for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles Abstract: This rulemaking would respond to The Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010, which directs the Secretary of Transportation to study and establish a motor vehicle safety standard that provides for a means of alerting blind and other pedestrians of motor vehicle operation. NHTSA is conducting research in this area and has not yet developed an estimate for the potential costs and benefits associated with this rulemaking action.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 30111; 49 USC 30115; 49 USC 30117; 49 USC 30166; 49 USC 322; Delegation of Authority at 49 CFR 1.50 Legal Deadline: Legislation requires the Secretary of Transportation to initiate rulemaking by July 2012 and issue a final rule not later than January 2014. Action Source Description Date NPRM Statutory Initiate rulemaking 07/05/2012 Other Statutory 01/03/2014

Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: The Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010, signed into law on January 4, 2011, directs the Secretary to study and establish a motor vehicle safety standard that provides for a means of alerting blind and other pedestrians of motor vehicle operation. Prior to that, in June 2008, NHTSA held a public meeting to provide a forum for interested parties to discuss the issue of quieter cars and established a docket (Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0108) to collect information on the issue. Subsequently, the Agency developed and initiated a research plan to identify the critical safety scenarios in which quieter vehicles may pose a hazard to blind and other pedestrians; identify and evaluate various countermeasures to address the safety problem; and support the development of a specification for an artificial vehicle sound.
Legal Basis: Section 30111, title 49 of the U.S.C. states that the Secretary shall prescribe motor vehicle safety standards.

Alternatives: The Agency is not pursuing any alternatives.

Costs and Benefits: The costs and benefits of the potential changes addressed in this action have not yet been assessed.Risks: The Agency believes that there are no significant risks associated with this rulemaking and that only beneficial outcomes will occur. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 07/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: Business Federalism: No Energy Affected: No International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of international interest. RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Agency Contact: Marisol Medri Safety Engineer Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -6987 E- Mail: marisol.medri@dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA ) RIN: 2127-AK96

View Related Documents

Title: Motorcoach Rollover Structural Integrity Abstract: This rulemaking would promulgate a new FMVSS for rollover structural integrity requirements for motorcoaches. In August 2007, NHTSA published a motorcoach safety plan identifying four specific priority items: Seat belts on motorcoaches, rollover structural integrity, emergency evacuation, and fire safety. The DOT published a comprehensive motorcoach safety action plan in November 2009 that reiterated NHTSA's motorcoach safety priorities. This rulemaking also addresses six recommendations issued by the NTSB on motorcoach roof strength and structural integrity.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 49 CFR 571 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 30111; 49 USC 30115; 49 USC 30117; 49 USC 30166; 49 USC 322; Delegation of Authority at 49 CFR 1.50 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: Over the 10-year period between 1999 and 2008, there were 54 fatal motorcoach crashes resulting in 186 fatalities. During this period, on average, 16 fatalities have occurred annually to occupants of motorcoaches in crash and rollover events, with about 2 of these fatalities being drivers and 14 being passengers. However, while motorcoach transportation overall is safe, when serious crashes of this vehicle type do occur, they can cause a significant number of fatal or serious injuries during a single event, particularly when occupants are ejected. This action is consistent with our detailed plans for improving motorcoach passenger protection, laid out in NHTSA's Approach to Motorcoach Safety 2007 and the Department of Transportation 2009 Motorcoach Action Plan (Docket No. NHTSA-2007-28793), as well as the Agency's Vehicle Safety and Fuel Economy Rulemaking and Research Priority Plan 2011 to 2013 (Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0108), and is responsive to six recommendations issued by the National Transportation Safety Board.
Legal Basis: Section 30111, title 49 of the U.S.C. states that the Secretary shall prescribe motor vehicle safety standards.

Alternatives: The Agency is not pursuing any alternatives.

Costs and Benefits: The costs and benefits of the potential changes addressed in this action have not yet been assessed.

Risks: The Agency believes that there are no significant risks associated with this rulemaking and that only beneficial outcomes will occur. Timetable:Action Date FR Cite NPRM 04/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: No Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Agency Contact: Shashi Kuppa Chief, Special Vehicles and Systems Division Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -3827 FAX: 202 493 -7002 E-Mail: shashi.kuppa@dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA ) RIN: 2127-AK97

View Related Documents

Title: Electronic Stability Control Systems for Heavy Vehicles Abstract: This rulemaking would promulgate a new Federal standard that would require stability control systems on truck tractors and motorcoaches that address both rollover and loss of control crashes, after an extensive research program to evaluate the available technologies, an evaluation of the costs and benefits, and a review of manufacturer ́s product plans. Rollover and loss of control crashes involving heavy vehicles is a serious safety issue that is responsible for 304 fatalities and 2,738 injuries annually. They are also a major cause of traffic tie-ups, resulting in millions of dollars of lost productivity and excess energy consumption each year. Suppliers and truck and motorcoach manufacturers have developed stability control technology for heavy vehicles to mitigate these types of crashes. Our preliminary estimate produces an effectiveness range of 37 to 56 percent against single-vehicle tractor-trailer rollover crashes and 3 to 14 percent against loss of control crashes that result from skidding on the road surface. With these effectiveness estimates, annually, we estimate 29 to 66 lives would be saved, 517 to 979 MAIS 1 to 5 injuries would be reduced, and 810 to 1,693 crashes that involved property damage only would be eliminated. Additionally, it would save $10 to $26 million in property damage and travel delays. Based on the technology unit costs and affected vehicles, we estimate technology costs would be $55 to $107 million, annually. However, the costs savings from reducing travel delay and property damage would produce net benefits of $128 to $372 million.
Priority: Economically Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: Yes Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 49 CFR 571 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 30111; 49 USC 30115; 49 USC 30117; 49 USC 30166; 49 USC 322; Delegation of Authority at 49 CFR 1.50 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: Rollover and loss of control crashes involving heavy vehicles is a serious safety issue that is responsible for 304 fatalities and 2,738 injuries annually. They are also a major cause of traffic tie-ups, resulting in millions of dollars of lost productivity and excess energy consumption each year. This action is consistent with our detailed plans for improving motorcoach passenger protection, laid out in NHTSA's Approach to Motorcoach Safety 2007 and the Department of Transportation 2009 Motorcoach Action Plan (Docket No. NHTSA-2007-28793), as well as the Agency's Vehicle Safety and Fuel Economy Rulemaking and Research Priority Plan 2011 to 2013 (Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0108), and is responsive to two recommendations issued by the National Transportation Safety Board.
Legal Basis: Section 30111, title 49 of the U.S.C. states that the Secretary shall prescribe motor vehicle safety standards.

Alternatives: The Agency is not pursuing any alternatives.

Costs and Benefits: The costs and benefits of the potential changes addressed in this action have not yet been assessed.

Risks: The Agency believes that there are no significant risks associated with this rulemaking and that only beneficial outcomes will occur.Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 04/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: No Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Agency Contact: George Soodoo Chief, Vehicle Safety Dynamics Division (NVS-122) Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -2720 FAX: 202 366 -4329 E-Mail: george.soodoo@dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA ) RIN: 2127-AK56

View Related Documents

Title: Require Installation of Seat Belts on Motorcoaches, FMVSS No. 208 Abstract: This rulemaking would require the installation of lap/shoulder belts in newly manufactured motorcoaches. Specifically, this rulemaking would establish a new definition for motorcoaches in 49 CFR part 571.3. It would also amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208 "Occupant Crash Protection" to require the installation of lap/shoulder belts at all driver and passenger seating positions. It would also require the installation of lap/shoulder belts at driver seating positions of large school buses in FMVSS no. 208. This rulemaking responds, in part, to recommendations made by the National Transportation Safety Board for improving bus safety.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Final Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 49 CFR 571.208; 49 CFR 571.3 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 30111; 49 USC 30115; 49 USC 30117; 49 USC 30166; 49 USC 322; Delegation of Authority at 49 CFR 1.50 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: Over the 10-year period between 1999 and 2008, there were 54 fatal motorcoach crashes resulting in 186 fatalities. During this period, on average, 16 fatalities have occurred annually to occupants of motorcoaches in crash and rollover events, with about 2 of these fatalities being drivers and 14 being passengers. However, while motorcoach transportation overall is safe, when serious crashes of this vehicle type do occur, they can cause a significant number of fatal or serious injuries during a single event, particularly when occupants are ejected.
Legal Basis: Section 30111, title 49 of the U.S.C., states that the Secretary shall prescribe motor vehicle safety standards.

Alternatives: In addition to the proposed installation of lap/shoulder belts in all passenger seating positions on motorcoaches, the Agency is also pursuing improvements to motorcoach rollover structural integrity, fire safety, electronic stability control, and emergency egress to improve occupant protection. Our detailed plans for improving motorcoach passenger protection can be found in NHTSA's Approach to Motorcoach Safety 2007 and the Department of Transportation 2009 Motorcoach Action Plan (Docket No. NHTSA-2007-28793), as well as the Agency's Vehicle Safety and Fuel Economy Rulemaking and Research Priority Plan 2011 to 2013 (Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0108). The Agency also alternatively evaluated proposing the installation of lap belts in all passenger seating positions on motorcoaches and is seeking comments on the issue of retrofitting older motorcoaches with seat belts.

Costs and Benefits: The anticipated total costs are expected to be $25.8 million for the 2,000 new motorcoaches produced each year, plus added fuel costs. The Agency estimates the proposal has the potential to save 1 to 8 fatalities and 144 to 794 non-fatal injuries annually assuming a range of seat belt use between 15 and 83 percent. The cost per equivalent life saved at a 7 percent discount rate is estimated to range from $1.8 to $9.9 million, based on an assumed seat belt use rate between 83 percent and 15 percent, respectively.Risks: The Agency believes there are no substantial risks to this rulemaking, and that only beneficial outcomes will occur as the industry moves to reduce injuries of motorcoach occupants. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 08/18/2010 75 FR 50958 NPRM Comment Period End 10/18/2010 Final Rule 07/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: No Federalism: No Energy Affected: No International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of international interest. RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Agency Contact: David Sutula Safety Standards Engineer Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -3273 FAX: 202 366 -4329 E-Mail: david.sutula@dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Transit Administration ( FTA ) RIN: 2132-AB02

View Related Documents

Title: Major Capital Investment Projects (RRR) Abstract: This rulemaking would make changes to the regulations that govern the New Starts discretionary funding program authorized by 49 U.S.C. 5309. FTA ́s initial rulemaking on this subject (RIN 2132-AA81), initiated to meet the statutory deadline, was terminated as the result of subsequent congressional action prohibiting FTA from issuing a rule.
Priority: Economically Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: Yes Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 49 CFR 611 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 USC 5309 Legal Deadline: Action Source Description Date Other Statutory 04/07/2006

Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: Section 3011 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) made a number of changes to 49 U.S.C. 5309, which authorizes the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) fixed guideway capital investment grant program known as "New Starts." SAFETEA-LU also created a new category of major capital investments that have a total project cost of less than $250 million, and that are seeking less than $75 million in section 5309 major capital investment funds. This rulemaking proposes to implement those changes and a number of other changes that FTA believes will improve the process for evaluating major capital investment projects.
Legal Basis: Section 5309, title 49 of the United States Code, requires the Secretary to promulgate regulations for the evaluation and selection of major capital investment projects that have a total project cost of less than $250 million, and that are seeking less than $75 million in section 5309 major capital investment funds.

Alternatives: This rulemaking is mandated by section 3011 of SAFETEA-LU, so there is not an alternative to pursuing rulemaking. Within the rulemaking process, FTA has already issued and has received comments on an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that will inform the various options FTA might pursue in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

Costs and Benefits: The single largest change in the New Starts program is the creation in SAFETEA-LU of the "SmallStarts" program. Over the first 10 years of the Small Starts program, the cumulative impact of transfer from New Starts to Small Starts will likely be $1.9 Billion, with a Net Present Value of $1.311 Billion using a discount rate of 7 percent. This effect is difficult to characterize in terms of cost or benefit, as it simply represents a "transfer of a transfer" from one governmental entity to another.

Risks: The proposed rulemaking provides a framework for a discretionary grant program; it does not propose to regulate other than for applicants for Federal funds. As such, the rulemaking poses no risks for the regulated community, other than for the risks inherent in pursuing Federal funds that might not be awarded if a project fails to satisfy the eligibility and evaluation criteria in the proposed regulatory structure. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite ANPRM 06/03/2010 75 FR 31383 ANPRM Comment Period End 08/02/2010 NPRM 01/00/2012

Additional Information: Includes Retrospective Review under E.O. 13563.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: No Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Agency Contact: Christopher VanWyk Attorney Advisor Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -1733 E- Mail: christopher.vanwyk@fta.dot.gov

Department of Transportation (DOT) Maritime Administration ( MARAD ) RIN: 2133-AB74

View Related Documents

Title: Regulations To Be Followed by All Departments, Agencies, and Shippers Having Responsibility To Provide a Preference for U.S.-Flag Vessels in the Shipment of Cargoes on Ocean Vessels Abstract: This rulemaking would revise and clarify the Cargo Preference rules that have not been revised substantially since 1971. Revisions would include an updated purpose and definitions section along with the removal of obsolete provisions. This rulemaking also would establish a new part 383 of the Cargo Preference regulations. This rulemaking would cover Public Law 110-417, section 3511, National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2009 changes to the cargo preference rules, which have not been substantially revised since 1971. The rulemaking also would include compromise, assessment, mitigation, settlement, and collection of civil penalties. Originally the agency had two separate rulemakings in process under RIN 2133-AB74 and 2133- AB75. RIN 2133-AB74 would have revised existing regulations and RIN 2133-AB75 would have established a new part 383: Guidance and Civil Penalties and implement Public Law 110-417, section 3511, National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2009. MARAD has decided it would be more efficient to merge both efforts under one; RIN 2133-AB75 has been merged with this action.
Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No CFR Citation: 46 CFR 381 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) Legal Authority: 49 CFR 1.66; 46 app USC 1101; 46 app USC 1241; 46 USC 2302 (e)(1); PL 91-469 Legal Deadline: None
Regulatory Plan: Statement of Need: On September 4, 2009, the USDA, MARAD, and USAID entered into a MOU regarding the proper implementation of the Cargo Preference Act. The MOU establishes procedures and standards by which owners and operators of oceangoing cargo ships may seek to designate each of their vessels as either a dry bulk carrier or a dry cargo liner, according to specified service-based criteria. With the help of OMB, these agencies are in the process of negotiating updates to the comprehensive cargo preference rule, which has not been significantly changed since 1971.Legal Basis: The Cargo Preference Act requires that Federal agencies take necessary and practicable steps to ensure that privately owned U.S.-flag vessels transport at least 50 percent of the gross tonnage of cargo sponsored under Federal programs to the extent such vessels are available at fair and reasonable rates for commercial vessels of the U.S., in a manner that will ensure a fair and reasonable participation of commercial vessels of the U.S. in those cargoes by geographic areas. 46 U.S.C. 55305(b). An additional 25 percent of gross tonnage of certain food assistance programs is to be transported in accordance with the requirements of 46 U.S.C. 55314.

Alternatives: TBD

Costs and Benefits: TBD

Risks: TBD Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 05/00/2012

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: No Small Entities Affected: No Federalism: No Energy Affected: No RIN Information URL: www.regulations.gov Public Comment URL: www.regulations.gov Related RINs: Related to 2133 -AB75 Agency Contact: Christine Gurland Department of Transportation Maritime Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington , DC 20590 Phone: 202 366 -5157 E- Mail: christine.gurland@dot.gov