Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 34053 

State and location Community 

No. 

Effective date authorization/cancellation of 

sale of flood insurance in community 

Current effective 

map date 

Date certain 

Federal 

assistance 

no longer 

available 

in SFHAs 

Region I 

Massachusetts: Haverhill, City of, Essex 

County.

250085 April 30, 1974, Emerg; February 16, 1983, 

Reg; July 19, 2018, Susp 

July 19, 2018 .... July 19, 2018. 

Region V 

Ohio: 

Fairfield County, Unincorporated Areas 390158 March 21, 1977, Emerg; April 17, 1989, 

Reg; July 19, 2018, Susp 

......do * ............. Do. 

Lancaster, City of, Fairfield County ....... 390161 July 28, 1975, Emerg; May 1, 1980, Reg; 

July 19, 2018, Susp 

......do ............... Do. 

Pickerington, City of, Fairfield and 

Franklin Counties.

390162 June 11, 1976, Emerg; August 5, 1991, 

Reg; July 19, 2018, Susp 

......do ............... Do. 

Region VI 

Oklahoma: 

Billings, Town of, Noble County ............ 400347 September 8, 1983, Emerg; June 19, 1985, 

Reg; July 19, 2018, Susp 

......do ............... Do. 

Tribe of Ponca Indians of Oklahoma, 

Noble and Kay Counties.

400239 N/A, Emerg; July 15, 2008, Reg; July 19, 

2018, Susp 

......do ............... Do. 

Red Rock, Town of, Noble County ....... 400135 June 12, 1975, Emerg; May 25, 1978, Reg; 

July 19, 2018, Susp 

......do ............... Do. 

Region IX 

California: 

Elk Grove, City of, Sacramento County 060767 N/A, Emerg; October 15, 2001, Reg; July 

19, 2018, Susp 

......do ............... Do. 

Folsom, City of, Sacramento County .... 060263 March 10, 1977, Emerg; January 6, 1982, 

Reg; July 19, 2018, Susp 

......do ............... Do. 

Rancho Cordova, City of, Sacramento 

County.

060772 N/A, Emerg; September 15, 2004, Reg; 

July 19, 2018, Susp 

......do ............... Do. 

Sacramento County, Unincorporated 

Areas.

060262 March 31, 1972, Emerg; March 15, 1979, 

Reg; July 19, 2018, Susp 

......do ............... Do. 

do = Ditto. 

Code for reading third column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Susp.—Suspension. 

Dated: June 29, 2018. 

Michael M. Grimm, 

Assistant Administrator for Mitigation, 

Federal Insurance and Mitigation 

Administration, Department of Homeland 

Security, Federal Emergency Management 

Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15372 Filed 7–18–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–12–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

49 CFR Part 672 

[Docket No. FTA–2015–0014] 

RIN 2132–AB25 

Public Transportation Safety 

Certification Training Program 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit 

Administration is issuing a final rule for 

the Public Transportation Safety 

Certification Training Program to 

provide revised minimum training 

requirements for Federal and State 

personnel and contractors who conduct 

safety audits and examinations of transit 

systems and for transit agency personnel 

and contractors who are directly 

responsible for safety oversight. The 

revised requirements reduce the number 

of training hours required by the interim 

training program. 

DATES: The effective date of this rule is 

August 20, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

program issues, contact FTA, Office of 

Transit Safety and Oversight (telephone: 

202–366–1783 or email: 

FTASafetyPromotion@dot.gov). For legal 

issues, contact Bruce Walker, FTA, 

Office of Chief Counsel (telephone: 202– 

366–9109 or email: Bruce.Walker@

dot.gov). Office hours are Monday 

through Friday from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. 

(EST), except Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Executive Summary 

A. Statutory Authority 

B. Summary of Major Provisions 

C. Costs and Benefits 

II. Rulemaking Background 

III. Summary of NPRM Comments and FTA 

Responses 

IV. Revised Regulatory Evaluation 

V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices 

I. Executive Summary 

In the Moving Ahead for Progress in 

the 21st Century Act (MAP–21) (Pub. L. 

112–141, July 6, 2012), Congress 

directed FTA to establish a 

comprehensive Public Transportation 

Safety Program (codified at 49 U.S.C. 

5329), one element of which is the 

Public Transportation Safety 

Certification Training Program 

(PTSCTP). As a first step to 

implementing the PTSCTP, FTA 

developed requirements for the interim 

safety certification training program 

(interim training program) which 

became effective on May 28, 2015 (see 

80 FR 10619). FTA then published a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

in the Federal Register on December 3, 

2015 (80 FR 75639), which generally 

proposed to adopt the interim training 

program requirements for the PTSCTP 

final rule. As noted in Appendix A, the 

requirements in this final rule reduce 

the number of required training hours 

from a total of 181 hours (22.625 days) 

to 143 hours (17.875 days). 

More recently, Congress enacted the 

Fixing America’s Surface Transportation 

Act (‘‘FAST’’) (Pub. L. 114–94, Dec. 4, 

2015). FAST did not make any 

amendments to 49 U.S.C. 5329(c)(1), the 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
34054 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

statute authorizing the PTSCTP, that 

would affect today’s rulemaking. 

Therefore, for convenience and accurate 

context, this rule will refer to MAP–21 

throughout the preamble for consistency 

with the NPRM. 

Today’s rule revises the minimum 

training requirements for State Safety 

Oversight Agency (SSOA) personnel 

and contractors who conduct safety 

audits and examinations of public 

transportation systems that receive 

Federal transit funds. The rule also 

provides minimum training 

requirements for transit agency 

employees who are directly responsible 

for safety oversight of public 

transportation systems that receive 

Federal transit funds. Although not 

subject to this rule, pursuant to 49 

U.S.C. 5329(c)(1), FTA personnel and 

contractors who conduct safety audits 

and examinations of rail public 

transportation systems will adhere to 

the applicable SSOA training 

requirements listed in Appendix A. 

A. Statutory Authority 

This rulemaking is issued under the 

authority of 49 U.S.C. 5329(c)(1), which 

requires the Secretary of Transportation 

to establish a public transportation 

safety certification training program for 

Federal and State employees, or other 

designated personnel, who conduct 

safety audits and examinations of public 

transportation systems, and employees 

of public transportation agencies 

directly responsible for safety oversight. 

The Secretary is authorized to issue 

regulations to carry out the general 

provisions of this statutory requirement 

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5329(c)(2) and 

(f)(7). 

B. Summary of Major Provisions 

Today’s rule adds a new part 672, 

Public Transportation Safety 

Certification Training Program, to title 

49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 

The purpose of the rule is to provide 

minimum requirements to enhance the 

proficiency of transit safety oversight 

professionals. In general, FTA 

maintained much of what was proposed 

in the NPRM. The mandatory training 

requirements apply to personnel who 

conduct safety audits and examinations 

of rail transit systems, and transit 

personnel with direct safety oversight 

responsibility of rail transit systems. 

Participation in the PTSCTP remains 

voluntary for State personnel, 

employees of bus transit agencies and 

the contractors directly responsible for 

safety oversight of public bus 

transportation systems. 

C. Costs and Benefits 

In general, FTA has retained the 

approach to costs contained in the 

NPRM. FTA quantified, to the extent 

possible, the costs associated with this 

rule. FTA expects that the codification 

of the PTSCTP will help promote a 

safety culture within the transit 

industry. This safety culture should 

help instill a transit agency-wide 

appreciation for shared goals, shared 

beliefs, best practices, and positive and 

vigilant attitudes towards safety. 

Where appropriate, FTA has modified 

the analysis for this rule from that of the 

NPRM. For example, in response to 

comments, FTA revised the hourly wage 

rate upward to better reflect average 

labor rates including benefits within the 

public transportation sector and 

factored in modest travel costs for 

attendance. Also, FTA has eliminated 

the 36-hour Transit System Security 

course and the 2-hour SMS Gap online 

course as mandatory components of the 

PTSCTP program. This change has 

resulted in a reduced burden on course 

participants. The regulatory analysis is 

conducted in two parts. First, under 

Executive Order 12866, by comparing 

the costs of issuing the rule in relation 

to practice prior to MAP–21 and second, 

under Executive Order 13771, since this 

final rule is considered a deregulatory 

action due to the reduction in existing 

safety training requirements. 

FTA used data from the 

Transportation Safety Institute (TSI) and 

reviewed the public transit workforce’s 

participation in FTA’s voluntary safety 

training programs to establish a 

maximum and minimum number of 

personnel, including contractors, that 

would be affected by the PTSCTP. The 

interim training program on which this 

rule is modeled became effective on 

May 28, 2015. Thus far, enrollment in 

the interim training program aligns with 

the assumptions FTA posed in the 

NPRM. 

To determine annual costs for 

recipients to implement PTSCTP 

requirements, we continue with a 

minimum and maximum case scenario. 

For the minimum case, we maintain an 

assumption that all designated 

personnel under this program have 

received the Transit Safety and Security 

Program (TSSP) Certificate and require 

only the safety management system 

(SMS) portion of the coursework 

described in Appendix A of this rule. 

For the maximum case, we assume no 

one subject to the rule has a TSSP 

Certificate. In this scenario, all 

designated personnel will have to 

complete both the TSSP (minus the 

Transit System Security (TSS) course) 

and SMS coursework over a three (3) 

year period. However, in response to 

comments, some travel costs are now 

included for attending courses if 

participants are unable to attend locally. 

Also, since TSSP training was 

previously provided by TSI, the cost of 

that cannot be attributed to this final 

rule. The cost numbers were adjusted 

accordingly. As a result of the changes 

above, and extending the analysis 

period to ten years instead of three to 

include refresher training and staff 

turnover, the maximum cost estimate is 

adjusted to approximately $1.0 million 

annualized at 7 percent discount rate 

instead of the undiscounted $2.6 

million per year over a three year period 

as noted in the NPRM. 

This final rule will replace the interim 

safety training program provisions 

issued in February 2015. The final rule 

eliminates two training provisions as 

mentioned above. The cost of the final 

rule therefore reduces the costs of the 

interim provisions by over $51,000 over 

a ten year period, discounted at a 7 

percent rate for the minimum case 

scenario and $1.6 million respectively 

for the maximum case scenario, 

resulting in a net benefit for the 

agencies. This results in an annualized 

cost savings (benefits) of $7,300 and 

$2,258 respectively for the two 

scenarios at the 7 percent discount rate. 

We note that these costs do not reflect 

costs associated with any additional 

countermeasures that better trained 

personnel will take to increase safety 

that they would not have identified 

prior to the training. Pursuant to 49 

U.S.C. 5329(e)(6)(C)(iv), recipients may 

use up to 0.5 percent of their FTA 

formula funds to cover up to 80 percent 

of costs of PTSCTP eligible 

expenditures. 

II. Rulemaking Background 

On October 3, 2013, FTA issued an 

Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (ANPRM) in the Federal 

Register on all aspects of FTA’s safety 

authority, including the training 

program. (See 78 FR 61251 at http://

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-10-03/ 

pdf/2013-23921.pdf). FTA noted that 

there are discrete and different skill-sets 

required for those who perform safety 

audit and examination functions 

compared to those who are directly 

responsible for safety oversight. 

Recognizing this distinction, FTA 

outlined its vision for the PTSCTP 

which included a wholly new FTAsponsored training curriculum to 

enhance the technical proficiency of 

each category of these safety 

professionals. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 34055 

On April 30, 2014, FTA published a 

document in the Federal Register 

requesting comment on its proposed 

vision for the interim training program. 

A number of the proposed requirements 

for the interim training program were 

based partly on recommendations 

provided by commenters to the ANPRM 

(see 79 FR 24363). FTA evaluated 

comments received in response to the 

document and promulgated the final 

interim training program requirements 

in a Federal Register document dated 

February 27, 2015 (see 80 FR 10619). 

On December 3, 2015, FTA published 

a Federal Register document proposing 

to adopt the interim training program as 

the requirements for the PTSCTP (see 80 

FR 75639). FTA reviewed comments to 

the NPRM and with this document 

promulgates the PTSCTP rule as 49 CFR 

part 672. This rule primarily applies to 

recipients of Chapter 53 funding; 

however, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 

5329(c)(1), the SSOA training 

requirements listed in Appendix A also 

apply to FTA personnel and contractors 

that conduct safety audits and 

examinations of rail transit systems. 

III. Summary of NPRM Comments and 

FTA Responses 

FTA proposed to utilize the interim 

training program requirements as the 

foundation for the PTSCTP. Similar to 

the interim training program, FTA 

proposed that the initial focus of the 

PTSCTP should be on enhancing the 

technical proficiency of safety oversight 

professionals in the rail transit industry. 

However, recognizing that safety is a 

priority for all public transit providers, 

safety oversight personnel of other 

modes of public transportation were 

encouraged to participate voluntarily. 

For that reason, FTA proposed that the 

initial mandatory PTSCTP requirements 

provide safety management system and 

technical training for Federal and SSOA 

personnel and their contractors, and rail 

transit agency personnel directly 

responsible for safety oversight of rail 

transit systems. Safety oversight 

personnel of recipients such as State 

Departments of Transportation (DOTs) 

and bus transit providers would be 

voluntary participants. 

Nineteen commenters responded to 

the NPRM as follows: Seven (7) public 

transportation agencies; three (3) State 

Safety Oversight Agencies; one (1) 

member of the public; one (1) Federal 

safety agency; two (2) national safety 

associations; two (2) national public 

transportation associations; two (2) State 

Department of Transportations (DOTs); 

and, one (1) letter representing five (5) 

State DOTs. FTA reviewed all 

comments and noted that only one 

commenter provided remarks that were 

not responsive to the scope of the 

NPRM. Following is a summary of the 

comments received and FTA’s 

responses. 

Section 672.1 Purpose 

FTA proposed to implement 49 U.S.C. 

5329(c)(1), by establishing a uniform 

curriculum of safety certification 

training to enhance the technical 

proficiency of individuals who are 

directly responsible for safety oversight 

of public transportation systems not 

subject to the safety oversight 

requirements of another Federal agency. 

FTA also noted that the rule would not 

preempt a State from implementing its 

own safety certification training 

requirements for public transportation 

systems subject to its jurisdiction. 

A commenter to this section 

expressed appreciation for FTA’s effort 

to adopt a uniform training curriculum 

and establish guidelines for all 

individuals who are directly responsible 

for safety oversight of public 

transportation agencies. Another 

commenter noted that FTA’s framework 

provides a training standard for system 

safety and ensures a basic level of 

competency in SMS across the public 

transportation industry. 

FTA Response: Upon review, FTA 

determined the proposed text requires 

clarification and is revising the text of 

paragraph (a) to include reference to 

personnel who conduct safety audits 

and examinations of public 

transportation agencies in this section. 

Additionally, the phrase ‘‘not subject to 

the safety oversight requirements of 

another Federal agency’’ that was 

proposed in the NPRM is not included 

in the final rule because the definition 

for ‘‘public transportation agency’’ 

indicates this exception. The remainder 

of the proposed text is included in the 

final rule. 

Section 672.3 Scope and Applicability 

FTA proposed that in general, the rule 

would apply to all recipients of Federal 

public transportation funding under 

Chapter 53 of Title 49 of the United 

States Code. FTA noted, however, in 

order to manage Federal and local 

resources, the initial mandatory 

requirements would apply to SSOA 

personnel and contractors conducting 

safety audits and examinations, as well 

as Rail Transit Agency (RTA) personnel 

directly responsible for safety oversight 

of rail transit systems not subject to the 

requirements of the Federal Railroad 

Administration. All other recipients of 

Chapter 53 funding would be able to 

participate voluntarily in the PTSCTP. 

In response to the NPRM, one 

commenter disagreed with FTA’s 

approach and recommended that both 

rail and bus transit system personnel be 

required participants in the PTSCTP. 

The commenter noted that motor 

vehicle crashes are the second-leading 

cause of unintentional death in the 

United States. The commenter stated 

that bus operations would benefit from 

defensive driving training as well as 

SMS and other specific safety training. 

Conversely, commenters affiliated 

with State DOTs and small bus transit 

providers agreed that FTA should not 

require safety oversight personnel from 

these entities to be mandatory 

participants. Many of these commenters 

referred to the excellent safety record of 

bus transit providers to support the 

exclusion of these entities from 

mandatory PTSCTP participation. The 

commenters stated that FTA should 

limit regulatory burdens on States and 

subrecipient transit agencies that 

receive funding for rural transit. Several 

commenters indicated that the final rule 

should expressly affirm that it does not 

apply to bus service providers other 

than on a voluntary basis. 

A few commenters indicated that the 

rule should be revised to include FTA 

personnel and its contractors that 

conduct safety audits and examinations 

as mandatory participants. These 

commenters noted that FTA should be 

subject to the same training 

requirements as SSOA employees and 

contractors. 

FTA Response: FTA continues to 

believe the initial focus of the PTSCTP 

should be on rail public transit 

providers and the Federal and State 

personnel who conduct safety audits 

and examinations. As noted in the 

preamble of the ANPRM published in 

2013, the intent is to initially focus 

regulatory efforts on those responsible 

for safety oversight of rail transit 

systems. FTA adopted this approach 

because the increased potential for 

catastrophic accidents, loss of life, and 

property damage associated with rail 

transit warranted the most immediate 

attention (see 78 FR 61252). 

FTA reiterates that although the 

initial regulatory focus is primarily on 

rail safety, safety in the bus transit 

industry will not be ignored. In 

addition, FTA continues to expand 

resources and partner with groups that 

promote bus safety. Recognizing that 

resources must be expended judiciously 

and enforcement efforts must be 

prioritized, FTA believes the current 

safety environment within the bus 

transit industry supports the option for 

voluntary participation in FTA’s safety 

training program. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
34056 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

However, it is important to note that 

FTA is developing a more systematic 

safety reporting regime for the public 

transit industry. FTA is also increasing 

its capability for reviewing and 

analyzing safety data and trends across 

the industry. Should analysis of safety 

data and trends indicate increased 

safety risk in the bus transit industry, 

FTA retains authority to implement 

mandatory training requirements for bus 

transit safety oversight personnel. 

In response to commenters who 

indicated this rule should apply also to 

FTA personnel conducting safety audits 

and examinations, FTA notes this 

rulemaking applies specifically to 

recipients of Federal transit funds under 

Chapter 53, Title 49 of the United States 

Code. However, FTA agrees that FTA 

personnel and contractors should 

observe the same training requirements 

as SSOA personnel and contractors. 

Accordingly, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 

5329(c)(1), this final rule requires FTA 

safety oversight personnel and 

contractors that conduct safety audits 

and examinations of rail fixed guideway 

public transportation systems to adhere 

to the same SSOA training courses 

noted in Appendix A. For the reasons 

herein, the text proposed in the NPRM 

is included in the final rule with 

clarifying edits. In paragraph (b), the 

phrase ‘‘that are not subject to the 

requirements of the Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA)’’ was removed 

because the definition of ‘‘rail fixed 

guideway public transportation 

systems’’ includes the statement that 

such systems are not subject to FRA’s 

jurisdiction. The text of paragraphs (a) 

and (c) are included in the final rule as 

proposed in the NPRM. 

Section 672.5 Definitions 

This section proposed definitions for 

some key terms in the rule. Many of the 

terms carry the same or similar meaning 

as used in other FTA documents. 

Additionally, some new terms were 

proposed with definitions consistent 

with common use. 

Seven commenters responded to this 

section. One commenter stated that the 

term ‘‘contractor’’ should be revised to 

include RTA contractors that implement 

the RTA’s safety program. Another 

commenter indicated the definition 

should be broadened to include all 

those who provide contracted services, 

supplies, or equipment to FTA 

recipients. Yet another commenter 

indicated the definition should be 

revised to include individuals and 

entities that perform safety-related tasks 

for an RTA through contract or other 

agreement. 

Two commenters indicated the terms 

‘‘safety audit’’ and ‘‘safety examination’’ 

required clarification. One questioned 

whether there is a practical difference 

between an examination conducted as 

part of the audit and the analysis of acts 

performed in conjunction with the 

examination. The other commenter 

indicated the definition for both terms 

require more specificity in order to 

distinguish between the activities 

associated with the terms and clarify 

who performs an examination. 

A commenter indicated that the 

definition for ‘‘designated personnel’’ 

should be revised to include FTA safety 

oversight personnel and contractors in 

order to make them subject to this rule. 

Other commenters indicated that FTA 

needed to provide more clarity 

regarding the definition for ‘‘directly 

responsible for safety oversight’’ relative 

to RTA designated personnel. Another 

commenter suggested that the definition 

for ‘‘State Safety Oversight Agency’’ 

should not include reference to 49 CFR 

part 659 since that rule is set to expire. 

FTA Response: FTA believes the 

definition for ‘‘contractor’’ proposed in 

the NPRM sufficiently describes entities 

that provide safety audit and 

examination services to FTA and 

SSOAs. However, FTA agrees with 

commenters who indicated the 

definition should be amended to 

include contractors that provide 

services to public transportation 

agencies. FTA also amended section 

672.13 to include RTA contractors. 

With regard to commenters who 

recommended revising the definition for 

‘‘designated personnel’’ to include FTA 

personnel and contractor support, as 

noted earlier, this rule generally applies 

to FTA recipients; therefore, FTA 

personnel and contractors are not 

included in this definition. However, as 

noted with the ‘‘contractor’’ definition, 

subparagraph (1) of this definition is 

revised to also include contractors that 

provide safety oversight services to rail 

transit agencies. 

FTA concurs with commenters 

regarding the definition for ‘‘directly 

responsible for safety oversight.’’ For 

clarity, FTA is revising the definition of 

the term relative to section 672.13(a), in 

recognition that RTA safety oversight 

personnel are already quite familiar 

with the safety oversight program 

requirements pursuant to 49 CFR part 

659. 

With regard to the terms ‘‘safety 

audit’’ and ‘‘safety examination’’, FTA 

agrees with those commenters who 

indicated the proposed definition for 

both terms should be reconciled. The 

terms are not unknown nor uncommon 

to those responsible for safety oversight 

of RTA systems. FTA, SSOA, and RTA 

personnel are familiar with activities 

associated with safety audits and 

examinations as the terms relate to 49 

CFR part 659 requirements, as well as 

the new SSO program rule at 49 CFR 

part 674. Further, it is unreasonable to 

interpret the term ‘‘examination’’ as it 

appears 49 U.S.C. 5329(c)(1) to refer to 

anything other than examinations 

related to the safety of public 

transportation systems. Therefore, to 

remain consistent with the terms as they 

appear in statute, the term safety audit 

will be included in the final rule but the 

term ‘‘safety examination’’ will be 

modified to ‘‘examination’’ to align with 

the definition as it appears in 49 CFR 

670.5. It is also noted that safety audits 

and examinations will generally be 

conducted by Federal and/or State 

personnel and contractors. 

Lastly, FTA agrees in part with the 

commenter who suggested the 

definition of ‘‘State Safety Oversight 

Agency’’ should be revised in reference 

to 49 CFR part 659. FTA notes 49 U.S.C. 

5329(d)(2) provides an RTA’s System 

Safety Program Plan (SSPP) developed 

pursuant to 49 CFR part 659 shall 

remain in effect until FTA publishes a 

final rule for Public Transportation 

Agency Safety Plans. SSOAs will 

continue to oversee RTAs’ SSPPs until 

the RTAs are required to adopt Public 

Transportation Agency Safety Plans in 

compliance with the future final 

rulemaking under 49 U.S.C. 5329(d). In 

recognition of this fact, this definition is 

revised in the final rule to include 

reference to the new rule at 49 CFR part 

674, as well as 49 CFR part 659. The 

remaining definitions proposed in the 

NPRM are included in this rule with 

minor edits to certain terms to ensure 

consistency with other FTA safety 

rulemakings. 

Section 672.11 Designated Personnel 

Who Conduct Safety Audits and 

Examinations 

FTA proposed that the SSOA identify 

personnel who conduct safety audits 

and examinations of the RTA(s) subject 

to its jurisdiction. In general, those 

identified would be SSOA employees 

and contractors whose duties include 

on-site safety audits and examinations 

of rail public transportation systems. 

FTA proposed this would include the 

SSOA managers and supervisors with 

direct authority over such SSOA 

personnel. 

FTA proposed that once identified, 

designated personnel would have 3 

years to complete the applicable 

PTSCTP training requirements. FTA 

also proposed that designated personnel 

would be required to complete at least 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 34057 

one hour of refresher training every 2 

years after completing the initial 

mandatory training. FTA further 

proposed that the SSOA would have 

discretion to determine the subject area 

and duration for such training. FTA also 

proposed that the interim training 

program requirements become the 

initial training requirements for this 

rule. The interim requirements were 

republished as Section IV of the NPRM. 

However, FTA did not seek comment on 

the curriculum of the interim training 

program since it was developed through 

public notice and comment and 

effective only since May 28, 2015. 

Five commenters responded to this 

section. One commenter indicated that 

State personnel, such as commissioners 

and directors, should not be required to 

participate in the PTSCTP requirements. 

The commenter stated that these 

individuals do not actually conduct 

safety audits and examinations of the 

rail transit systems under their 

jurisdiction. Other commenters 

indicated that FTA personnel and 

contractors should be included as 

designated personnel. 

Regarding refresher training, several 

commenters felt the two-year interval 

for refresher training was sufficient. 

However, one commenter disagreed 

with the two-year timeframe, indicating 

that more robust refresher training 

should be required annually with a 

minimum requirement of at least four 

hours of training. The commenter also 

stated that the initial timeframe for 

completing PTSCTP requirements 

should be less than the three years FTA 

proposed. One commenter 

recommended that FTA be more 

specific as to the required elements for 

refresher training. Another commenter 

stated that FTA should require at least 

one class of refresher training every two 

years without identifying a time limit 

for the class. Yet another commenter 

stated that refresher training should at 

minimum include the ‘‘technical 

training component’’ and ‘‘knowledge of 

agency’’ elements outlined in Section IV 

of the NPRM. 

FTA Response: In general, FTA 

believes those with direct management 

and supervisory responsibility of SSOA 

personnel and contractors that conduct 

safety audits and examinations should 

be subject to the PTSCTP training 

requirements. However, as indicated by 

a commenter, there are SSOA 

management personnel who do not 

directly oversee SSOA personnel and 

contractors. Conversely, there are 

managers and supervisors who do. In 

either case, FTA recognizes an SSOA is 

better situated to determine which 

managers and supervisors require 

technical knowledge or perform 

functions identified in the technical 

training plan each SSOA is required to 

develop to comport with 49 U.S.C. 

5329(e)(3)(E). For example, knowledge 

of railroad components is required only 

by those individuals actually 

conducting the examinations and audits 

of those specific railroad components, 

but not necessarily knowledge required 

of SSOA managers. 

In short, some SSOA managers and 

supervisors will not be subject to 

PTSCTP requirements; however, those 

with direct supervisory responsibility of 

SSOA personnel and contractors subject 

to this part should share a common 

framework for understanding issues of 

risk and mitigation. For that reason, 

these managers and supervisors should 

at minimum undertake the SMS and 

TSSP curriculum identified in 

Appendix A. As indicated earlier, the 

SSOA will consult with FTA as it 

develops its technical training plan. 

This consultation should assist the 

SSOA with determining which of its 

personnel and contractor support 

should participate in the PTSCTP. 

However, FTA does not expect directors 

or commissioners, or similar State DOT 

personnel not involved in the day-today operations of an SSOA to be 

identified as designated personnel. 

In response to comments suggesting 

the proposed three-year timeframe for 

completing the initial PTSCTP 

requirements is too long, FTA notes that 

RTAs and SSOAs already engage in 

significant safety training including the 

voluntary TSSP which underpins the 

PTSCTP requirements. FTA disagrees 

that the PTSCTP requirements should 

be completed in less than three years. 

FTA believes such a requirement would 

unduly burden recipients while not 

significantly contributing to public 

transportation safety. Furthermore, FTA 

notes that 49 U.S.C. 5329 provides 

additional tools that FTA can utilize if 

it finds that targeted training or 

remedial action is required 

immediately. 

In response to comments regarding 

proposed refresher training 

requirements, from the onset FTA has 

stated its intent to take a comprehensive 

approach to safety training 

requirements. FTA recognizes there will 

be safety training requirements in other 

rules FTA is implementing for the 

National Public Transportation Safety 

Program (National Safety Program) 

which may apply also to some PTSCTP 

participants. FTA continues to believe 

that refresher training should be 

relevant to a recipient’s specific 

circumstances and the recipient is in the 

best position to determine the subject 

matter and timeframe allotted for such 

training. In addition, FTA will provide 

guidance to assist recipients with 

identifying relevant subject matter for 

safety oversight refresher training. 

FTA believes the proposed 

requirements are sufficient and that a 

one-year training completion 

requirement or annual refresher training 

requirement would not provide 

significant value considering other 

safety training initiatives will be 

occurring during the same timeframe. 

For these reasons, the proposed rule text 

is included in the final rule except FTA 

omitted paragraph (c), which provided 

that the Reference Document was 

available on the FTA website. The 

training curriculum and requirements 

are now found in Appendix A to this 

rule. 

Section 672.13 Designated Personnel 

of Public Transportation Agencies 

In the NPRM, FTA proposed that a 

recipient be required to identify its 

personnel whose job function is 

‘‘directly responsible for safety 

oversight’’ of the public transportation 

system. FTA noted that the unique 

organizational framework of public 

transit systems does not reasonably 

allow for uniform designation of 

positions or functions that are ‘‘directly 

responsible for safety oversight.’’ 

FTA stated that once identified, 

designated personnel would have three 

years to complete the applicable 

training for the PTSCTP. FTA also 

proposed that designated personnel 

would be required to complete at least 

one hour of refresher training every two 

years following the completion of the 

initial PTSCTP requirements. FTA 

further stated that RTA personnel would 

be mandatory participants while State 

DOT and bus transit system personnel 

would be voluntary participants. All 

recipients would have discretion to 

determine the subject area and time for 

biannual refresher training. Seven 

commenters provided responses to this 

section. In general, commenters 

responded to FTA’s proposed timeframe 

for completing the PTSCTP 

requirements; however, two 

commenters indicated they were unable 

to locate the specific requirements of the 

Reference Document. 

One commenter stated that employees 

of rail systems should be required to 

meet the training requirements as soon 

as possible in order to ensure the safest 

transit operations for passengers. 

Several other commenters indicated that 

the three-year period for completing the 

required training should be extended 

because of potential scheduling 

conflicts. The commenters noted that 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
34058 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

FTA’s course availability is not always 

conducive to transit personnel being 

able to attend the training. Some 

commenters also indicated that there 

may be instances where the course 

location could interfere with 

attendance. One commenter suggested 

that FTA provide its training schedule 

as far in advance as possible in order to 

assist recipients with minimizing travel 

costs. The commenter also 

recommended that FTA increase the 

number of online courses. 

One commenter indicated that FTA 

should not require the Transit System 

Security (TSS) course as a mandatory 

component of the PTSCTP curriculum 

since security matters are not generally 

under the purview of safety oversight 

personnel. Two commenters noted that 

the proposed rule required rail transit 

agencies to provide technical training to 

SSOA personnel and suggested that 

FTA instead develop specific rail transit 

technical training courses. 

Regarding the requirement to identify 

personnel who are directly responsible 

for safety oversight, one commenter 

recommended that such personnel be 

limited to policymaking officials with 

broad safety accountabilities, rather 

than each employee who has a function 

or duty specific to an agency’s safety 

plan. The commenter suggested that the 

rule apply only to those individuals 

who are accountable for the overall 

development, implementation, and 

review of the agency’s safety program. 

Another commenter indicated that FTA 

use an approach in which it amplifies 

an SMS model where implementation of 

the agency safety plan is the shared 

responsibility of every position within 

the system (i.e., safety, operations, 

maintenance, human resources, 

training, and administration). The 

commenter further suggested that FTA 

provide guidance, or identify criteria to 

assist agencies with objectively 

identifying staff subject to the PTSCTP 

requirements. 

FTA Response: As noted in response 

to the section above, FTA disagrees with 

commenters who suggested that three 

years is not enough time to complete the 

required training. FTA has no indication 

that the current level of course offerings 

will not support completion of the 

requirements within three years. Review 

of the registration data website for 

interim training program registration 

indicates a significant number of those 

enrolling in the PTSCTP have already 

completed all, or some portion of the 

required TSSP component of the 

certificate program. However, FTA is 

providing additional course delivery 

dates to alleviate the potential burden 

due to the perceived lack of availability. 

To facilitate course availability and 

predictability, FTA will continue to 

expand its capacity for delivering the 

PTSCTP curriculum at sites around the 

country and publish schedules as early 

as possible. Where appropriate, FTA 

will also work on expanding web based 

courses to increase training 

opportunities and further reduce costs 

associated with the PTSCTP. 

Regarding SSOA training by RTAs, 

FTA did not propose a requirement for 

RTAs to provide technical training to 

SSOA personnel. However, FTA 

encourages SSOAs and RTAs to engage 

in joint training as much as practicable. 

This collaboration will only serve to 

promote a common framework of 

knowledge and improve communication 

between the RTA and the State 

regulator. Any training agreements 

between SSOAs and RTAs will be 

developed between the respective 

parties. If an RTA incurs additional 

expenses when including SSOA 

personnel with its training, then the 

parties can negotiate reimbursement for 

such expenses since SSOA training is an 

eligible expenditure of 49 U.S.C. 5329(e) 

grant funds. 

FTA disagrees with commenters who 

suggested that FTA identify designated 

personnel for public transportation 

agencies. As commenters indicated in 

response to question 52 of the ANPRM 

that preceded the NPRM to this rule, 

each agency has its specific 

organizational construct and assignment 

of safety oversight functions. FTA 

continues to believe that each agency 

should have discretion to determine 

which functions and positions are 

directly responsible for safety oversight 

of the agency. However, FTA will 

provide guidance to assist RTAs with 

objectively identifying such personnel. 

FTA agrees with commenters who 

indicated that employees who are in a 

position to be accountable for the 

development, implementation, and 

review of the agency’s safety program 

should participate in the PTSCTP. This 

would also include RTA contractors. 

But the designation should not be 

limited only to personnel with 

management responsibility for the 

agency’s safety plan. The designation 

should also include staff with primary 

responsibility for developing, 

implementing, and monitoring the 

agency’s safety plan, as well as 

personnel who implement and execute 

SSOA requirements at the RTA. 

Depending on the size and 

organizational framework of the agency, 

this could be a few personnel or a 

sizable office or branch. The following 

guidance is provided to assist RTAs 

with identifying designated personnel: 

SSOA’s Program Standard—Processes 

and procedures an RTA must have in 

place to comply with the standard: Who 

at the RTA is responsible for 

developing, implementing or 

maintaining the following elements of 

the program standard? 

(1) Program management; 

(2) Program standard development; 

(3) Program policy and objectives; 

(4) Oversight of the agency safety 

plans and internal safety reviews (who 

will respond to the SSOA if the SSOA 

determines the plans are inadequate?); 

(5) Triennial SSOA audits of Rail 

Public Transportation Agency Safety 

Plans (who will participate in the audit 

process and follow up on any findings 

or recommendations?); 

(6) Accident notification (who is 

responsible for making appropriate 

notifications to FTA, SSOAs or when 

applicable FRA?); 

(7) Investigations (who will conduct 

internal accident investigations or 

coordinate RTA investigations in 

accordance with the SSO program 

standard and any agreements in effect?), 

(if the RTA does not agree with 

elements of an SSOA report, who will 

submit a written dissent from the 

report?); 

(8) Corrective action plans (CAPs) 

(who is responsible for developing and 

carrying out the CAPs required by the 

SSOA?), (who will manage an issued 

CAP, identifying steps to minimize, 

control, correct, or eliminate the risks 

and hazards identified by the CAP, the 

schedule for taking those actions, and 

the individuals responsible for taking 

those actions?), (who will periodically 

report to the SSOA on its progress in 

carrying out the CAP?), (who will 

collect, track, and analyze data on 

occurrences to develop leading 

indicators, to prevent the likelihood of 

future events, and to inform the practice 

of SMS across the RTA?). 

FTA recognizes recipients may have 

questions as to which positions or 

functions should be designated as 

PTSCTP participants. Recipients may 

contact FTA via email at 

FTASafetyPromotion@dot.gov for 

assistance. 

For the reasons herein, proposed 

paragraph (a) is revised to include RTA 

contractors and the phrase ‘‘not subject 

to the safety oversight of another 

Federal agency’’ is removed because the 

definition of ‘‘rail fixed guideway public 

transportation systems’’ includes the 

statement that such systems are not 

subject to FRA’s jurisdiction. Paragraphs 

(b) and (c) are included in the final rule 

as proposed in the NPRM and proposed 

paragraph (d) is omitted now that the 

PTSCTP curriculum and training 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 34059 

requirements are listed in Appendix A 

to this rule. 

Section 627.15 Evaluation of Prior 

Certification and Training 

In the NPRM, FTA acknowledged that 

participants who have completed safety 

training from entities other than FTA 

should be able to have that training 

reviewed to determine if it is equivalent 

to the competencies of the PTSCTP 

curriculum. To that end, FTA proposed 

that a participant provide official 

documentation to FTA from the 

organization that conducted the 

training. FTA stated that the 

documentation should indicate the 

date(s) and subject matter of the 

training. In addition, the participant 

would be required to provide a narrative 

summary of the training objectives and 

the competencies obtained as a result of 

the training. 

Six commenters responded to this 

section. In general, commenters agreed 

that FTA should review other safety 

training for PTSCTP equivalency. 

However, most did not agree with FTA’s 

proposed process. Three commenters 

indicated that FTA should proactively 

evaluate training provided by other 

organizations. Commenters indicated 

the participant should not have to 

describe how the training meets the 

competency of the PTSCTP curriculum. 

One commenter recommended that FTA 

‘‘grandfather’’ existing transit agency 

personnel who possess five years of 

experience executing the requirements 

of 49 CFR part 659. The commenter also 

stated that FTA should provide PTSCTP 

credit for personnel who possess a 

Certified Safety Professional credential/ 

license. Another commenter suggested 

that FTA broadly and favorably consider 

equivalent training requests from those 

holding safety credentials, and degrees 

in safety. Lastly, one commenter noted 

that FTA should establish an objective 

measure for evaluating prior training 

and certification that is predictable, 

transparent, and fast. 

FTA Response: In general, FTA agrees 

with commenters who indicated there 

should be an expedited and transparent 

process for evaluating safety training 

provided by entities other than FTA. To 

that end, FTA continues to refine its 

process for evaluating a participant’s 

prior safety training. At this time, FTA 

is not prepared to provide independent 

approval of prior safety training or 

safety professional certifications 

without the participant providing 

official documentation and describing 

how the training or designation meets 

the objectives of the specific 

requirements of the PTSCTP. As the 

training program matures, FTA 

anticipates that it will offer a list of 

courses and training that meet the 

PTSCTP requirements. Accordingly, the 

final rule includes the text as proposed 

in the NPRM. 

Section 672.21 Records 

In the NPRM, FTA noted that an 

essential requirement of any training 

program is the maintenance of adequate 

records of training. To that end, FTA 

proposed to maintain an electronic 

record of each PTSCTP participant via 

its online enrollment process. However, 

FTA stated that the recipient would be 

required to ensure that its personnel 

periodically update their information 

with his or her course completion 

information. Designated personnel can 

enroll for the program and update their 

individual training records as they 

complete the applicable training 

requirements by following the 

instructions provided at FTA’s training 

website. The following web address 

provides participants with enrollment 

and registration information: https:// 

www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-andguidance/safety/safety-training. Further, 

each recipient will be responsible for 

maintaining an updated training record 

for its designated personnel. 

Additionally, FTA proposed that each 

SSOA maintain training records to 

document the technical training of its 

designated personnel for at least five 

years from the date the record is created. 

FTA noted this documentation would 

assist the SSOA in complying with the 

grant requirements in accordance 49 

U.S.C. 5329(e)(3)(E) by documenting 

that SSOA personnel and contractors 

have received training to perform 

requisite safety oversight functions. 

FTA received three comments to this 

section. One commenter indicated this 

section should be revised to require 

FTA to also maintain records of its 

personnel and contractors that are 

subject to PTSCTP training 

requirements. Commenters agreed that 

designated personnel should enroll 

through FTA’s safety database; however, 

two commenters indicated that FTA 

should be responsible for updating the 

participant’s training completion 

information, not the recipient. 

One commenter stated that an SSOA 

should not be responsible for 

maintaining training records for its 

contractors. The commenter stated that 

SSOAs should be able to require a 

contractor to provide certification 

showing the contractor has completed 

the required training. The commenter 

suggested that once a contractor has 

provided the initial documentation, the 

SSOA should not be required to 

maintain their training records and the 

contractor should be responsible for 

maintaining their own records. The 

commenter also indicated that SSOA 

management should be able to rely on 

the FTA database to track the progress 

and status of SSOA personnel and 

contractors without the need for 

additional tracking mechanisms. 

FTA Response: FTA concurs with 

commenters who indicated that FTA 

should administer and maintain the 

records for PTSCTP participants. 

However, FTA’s ability to access 

participant training records for the 

PTSCTP does not relieve a recipient of 

the responsibility for ensuring its 

designated personnel, including its 

contractors, are in compliance with this 

part. The recipient is in the best 

position to ensure its designated 

personnel are timely updating course 

completion information. Furthermore, 

this process will assist the recipient 

with certifying compliance with this 

part. 

FTA also agrees that a recipient, 

including an SSOA, should not be 

responsible for developing and 

maintaining training records for 

contractors. The contractor should be 

responsible for documenting and 

maintaining training records for its 

personnel. However, the recipient is 

responsible for ensuring its contractors 

comply with this part. To that end, a 

recipient may require its contractors to 

provide timely training documentation 

for contractor personnel subject to this 

part. To assist with grant documentation 

requirements, an SSOA should retain 

records of both its personnel and 

contractors in accordance with the 

timeframe prescribed in section 

672.21(c) of this part. 

As noted previously, this rule does 

not apply to FTA personnel and 

contractors. However, training records 

for FTA personnel are maintained in 

accordance with Federal standards; 

therefore, FTA disagrees with 

commenters who indicated this section 

should be revised to apply to FTA. 

However, as indicated by commenters, 

paragraph (b) is amended by replacing 

the term ‘‘maintain’’ with the term 

‘‘retain’’ in reference to an SSOA’s 

responsibility for the training records of 

its contractors. Paragraph (a) is included 

in the final rule as proposed, but 

subparagraphs (c)(1) through (5) are not 

included because Appendix A provides 

information required for SSOA 

technical training records. 

Section 672.23 Availability of Records 

FTA proposed a requirement for the 

safekeeping and limited release of 

information maintained in accordance 

with the requirements of this part. FTA 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
34060 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

stated that information maintained in 

the training records should not be 

released without the consent of the 

participant for whom the record is 

maintained, except in limited 

circumstances. FTA further noted that a 

participant should receive a copy of his 

or her training records without cost to 

him or her upon request. 

In the NPRM, FTA stated that a 

recipient would be required to provide 

appropriate Federal and SSOA 

personnel access to all of the recipient’s 

facilities where required training is 

conducted. In addition, the recipient 

would be required to grant access to all 

training records required to be 

maintained by this part to appropriate 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

personnel and appropriate State officials 

who are responsible for safety oversight 

of public transportation systems. 

Additionally, a recipient would provide 

information regarding a participant’s 

training when requested by the National 

Transportation Safety Board when such 

request is made as part of an accident 

investigation. 

FTA Response: FTA received no 

comments directly related to this 

section. Accordingly, the text proposed 

in the NPRM is included in the final 

rule. 

Section 672.31 Requirement To Certify 

Compliance 

FTA noted in the NPRM that 

recipients are required annually to 

certify their compliance with Federal 

grant requirements as a condition for 

receiving Federal funding. FTA 

proposed that recipients for whom the 

PTSCTP training requirements are 

mandatory should self-certify 

compliance with this part through the 

annual FTA certification and assurances 

process. FTA proposed that the 

recipient identify someone within the 

organization as authorized to certify 

compliance with this part on behalf of 

the recipient. 

One commenter to this section stated 

that FTA should annually certify its 

compliance with the PTSCTP 

requirements. Two other commenters 

indicated that similar to FTA’s current 

annual certification and assurance 

process, a recipient’s chief executive, 

such as the General Manager or 

equivalent, should be the official 

authorized to certify compliance. One of 

the commenters stated that a recipient’s 

board of directors primarily performs 

policy-setting duties and should not be 

asked to certify safety compliance as it 

would be beyond their scope. Lastly, 

one commenter asked if the annual 

certification requirement also applied to 

SSOAs. 

FTA Response: The proposed rule 

stated that the recipient’s governing 

body or authority should identify the 

person responsible for certifying the 

recipient’s compliance with this part. 

FTA did not indicate that the governing 

body or chief executive would 

specifically have to certify the 

recipient’s compliance with this part. 

Currently, recipients undergo FTA’s 

annual self-certification and assurance 

process as a condition of receiving 

Federal transit funds administered 

through FTA (see https://

www.fta.dot.gov/funding/granteeresources/certifications-and-assurances/ 

certifications-assurances). Each 

recipient, including an SSOA, is 

required to annually certify compliance 

with numerous Federal requirements as 

a condition for receiving Chapter 53 

funds. However, FTA is not a recipient; 

therefore, FTA is not included in the 

annual certification process. For 

recipients however, annual certification 

of compliance with this part will now 

be included with FTA’s annual 

certifications and assurance. 

Consequently, a recipient is required to 

designate an authorized representative 

for the purpose of signing the 

certification on behalf of the recipient. 

Accordingly, the text proposed in the 

NPRM is included in the final rule. 

Section 672.33 Compliance as a 

Condition of Financial Assistance 

This section was proposed in the 

NPRM to outline options available to 

FTA when a recipient does not comply 

with the requirements of this part. This 

section indicated the Administrator’s 

discretion to withhold Federal funds 

and provided a notice and comment 

period for recipients. 

Two commenters responded to this 

section. One commenter suggested the 

section be revised to include its 

applicability to SSOAs unless they are 

considered recipients. The other 

commenter indicated that absent 

clarification regarding how to identify 

designated personnel there is the 

possibility for an uneven identification 

of personnel across different agencies 

which could lead to a situation, where 

in hindsight, the Administrator may 

decide that a recipient has failed to 

comply with the requirements. 

FTA Response: FTA has reviewed this 

section in conjunction with the 

provisions of the Public Transportation 

Safety Program Safety Program (see 49 

CFR part 670). FTA has determined that 

the provisions therein provide a 

recipient with sufficient notice and due 

process regarding the Administrator’s 

authority and enforcement actions for 

noncompliance with this part. 

Therefore, FTA is not including 

proposed section 672.33 in this final 

rule. 

Appendix A: Public Transportation 

Safety Certification Training Program 

FTA proposed adopting the interim 

training program requirements listed in 

Section IV of the NPRM as the initial 

training requirements for the PTSCTP. 

FTA noted that the interim 

requirements were developed with 

public notice and comment and only 

became effective on May 28, 2015. For 

that reason, FTA only requested 

comments about the effectiveness of the 

curriculum and technical training 

requirements. 

A number of commenters addressed 

FTA’s proposed implementation of the 

PTSCTP and its applicability which we 

have already discussed; however, one 

commenter directly addressed the 

effectiveness of the proposed 

curriculum. The commenter noted that 

FTA should not require the Transit 

System Security (TSS) course as a 

mandatory component of the PTSCTP 

curriculum since security matters are 

not generally under the purview of 

safety oversight personnel. 

FTA Response: FTA agrees with the 

commenter and has revised the PTSCTP 

curriculum so that the TSS course is no 

longer a required component. FTA 

recognizes the value of the TSS course 

and will continue to offer it, but concurs 

that security is not within the general 

scope of training required to implement 

49 U.S.C. 5329(c)(1) safety oversight 

requirements. Additionally, FTA has 

determined that the course objectives 

for the 2-hour online ‘‘SMS Gap course’’ 

training are now included in the online 

‘‘SMS Awareness’’ course and the ‘‘SMS 

Principles for Transit’’ course; therefore, 

it is no longer a requirement. 

For clarity, FTA is renaming the 

‘‘SMS Principles for Rail Transit’’ to 

‘‘SMS Principles for Transit’’ in order to 

reflect its broader applicability across 

the industry. In addition, the ‘‘SMS 

Principles for SSO Programs’’ course is 

currently under development and is not 

expected to be available by the effective 

date of this rule; therefore, participants 

will have three years from the course’s 

date of availability to complete it. The 

curriculum for the PTSCTP is revised 

accordingly and appears as Appendix A 

to this part and is no longer referred to 

as the Reference Document as noted in 

the NPRM. FTA will continue to 

evaluate the effectiveness of the 

PTSCTP requirements and should FTA 

determine revisions are warranted, FTA 

will seek public comment prior to doing 

so. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 34061 

IV. Revised Regulatory Evaluation 

Before MAP–21, FTA funded and 

supported a wide variety of safety 

training at no direct cost to the transit 

industry and participants engaged in the 

training on a voluntary basis. 

Subsequently, MAP–21 mandated that 

FTA develop an interim training safety 

certification program to enhance the 

technical qualifications of designated 

personnel directly responsible for safety 

oversight of public transportation 

systems in advance of a final rule for the 

Public Transportation Safety 

Certification Training Program. FTA 

noted that the interim program 

requirements were a condition of 

receiving Federal grant funding under 

sections 5307, 5311, and 5329 of title 

49, United States Code. Although the 

interim program was not promulgated as 

a rulemaking, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 

5334(k), FTA sought public comment on 

the interim provisions. It was noted that 

most of a participant’s cost in the 

interim program would be an eligible 

expenditure of Federal financial 

assistance provided under sections 

5307, 5311, and 5329 grants and no cost 

benefit analysis was conducted. FTA 

will now incorporate many components 

of the interim program in the final rule 

for the PTSCTP; however, with a 

lessened regulatory burden for required 

participants. 

The regulatory analyses below 

include the cost estimates for the final 

rule as required by Executive Order 

12866 (Regulatory Planning and 

Review), using pre-MAP–21 estimates as 

the base line with revisions based on 

comments to the NPRM. The analysis 

also includes a deregulatory action cost 

estimate as required by Executive Order 

13771 (Reducing Regulation and 

Controlling Regulatory Costs), as the 

cost of the final rule is less than the cost 

of the interim rule. 

For the initial analysis to assess the 

costs for the PTSCTP, FTA first 

reviewed data from the Transportation 

Safety Institute (TSI) the organization 

that provides FTA sponsored training 

for transit grantees and stakeholders. 

Using the TSI attendance data for the 

transit safety courses and knowledge of 

how SSOAs and rail transit agencies are 

organized, FTA developed a maximum 

and minimum number of personnel, to 

include employees and contractors that 

would be affected by the PTSCTP. FTA 

also reviewed the number of FTA 

personnel who participate in safety 

audits and examinations and 

determined the number of FTA 

personnel that would be required to 

undergo some level of training and 

certification. 

In developing annual costs for 

personnel that would attend the 

PTSCTP, FTA assumed a minimum and 

maximum case scenario. Under the 

minimum case scenario, it is assumed 

that no additional staff will take the 

TSSP other than the ones who are 

already doing so. The TSI data prior to 

MAP–21 shows that on average 250 

individuals attended the four TSSP 

courses, ranging from 175 attendees for 

transit rail incident investigations to 345 

attendees for the transit rail system 

safety course. Given the total number of 

transit and SSOA entities, there were 

between two to three individuals per 

agency on average attending the courses 

already. The only additional training 

taken would be for the Safety 

Management System curriculum. In 

addition, to meet the requirements of 

this rule, the agencies would need to 

apply for certification for courses 

attended at TSI or at another venue and 

to maintain records of the training 

completed. The cost of the additional 

effort is included below. 

The maximum case scenario assumes 

a higher number of attendees than the 

current practice and assumes no prior 

completion of safety training. This 

scenario is being presented to show the 

cost of the rule if the level of attendance 

increases due to the publication of this 

final rule and if the training already 

taken by individuals does not satisfy the 

TSSP course requirements under this 

final rule. 

FTA notes that this analysis includes 

only the costs that could be quantified, 

which are those costs associated with 

the training, certification and record 

keeping. It does not reflect costs 

associated with any additional 

countermeasures that better trained 

personnel might take to increase safety 

that they would not have identified 

prior to taking the training. 

The initial cost-benefit analysis was 

provided in the NPRM for public 

comment. Several commenters asked if 

additional Federal funding would be 

available to pay for the training and 

asked why additional funding is not 

available for RTAs, but available to 

SSOAs. 

FTA Response: Funding 

determinations are made by Congress 

through statutory parameters for 

Chapter 53 recipients, including RTAs. 

In this instance, the training costs 

associated with the PTSCTP are an 

eligible expense for the Federal grants 

available to RTAs. However, Congress 

has provided funding for the State 

Safety Oversight program to eliminate 

the conflict of interest inherent between 

SSOAs and RTAs when RTAs provide 

funding to SSOAs that provide oversight 

of these RTAs. Furthermore, the 

incremental cost per RTA is not 

expected to be significant considering 

many agency employees already 

undertake or have completed most of 

the required courses. Additionally, 

much of the new SMS training is 

available online at no additional 

monetary cost, except staff time. 

Several commenters noted the 

additional cost burden of travel to meet 

the training requirements if the courses 

are not available locally or online. One 

commenter indicated that its costs could 

be approximately $3,000 per course per 

employee to take the TSSP courses. It 

was also mentioned that employees will 

be away from their jobs to attend the 

training and this will result in loss of 

productivity. One commenter requested 

that costs be shown on a per capita basis 

for each recipient instead of the 

aggregate estimate reflected in the 

NPRM. 

FTA Response: FTA does not expect 

agencies to incur significant additional 

travel costs since much of the SMS 

training is available online and FTA 

plans to increase its capacity to deliver 

training locally, which will provide 

more opportunities to attend without 

incurring additional expenses. FTA will 

also make training schedules available 

earlier to support improved scheduling. 

However, recognizing there may be 

occasions where travel may be required; 

FTA is including estimated travel costs 

in the revised assumptions for this rule. 

Regarding cost estimates (labor cost), 

the assumptions herein reflect the loss 

of individual productivity to attend the 

training. It is anticipated that this cost 

will be regained through benefits from 

improved safety performance of the 

agencies. However, FTA notes that it is 

a challenge to project costs per recipient 

because each recipient is responsible for 

identifying which of its safety oversight 

personnel will be required participants. 

Furthermore, participants will have 

varying degrees of requirements to 

fulfill depending on their prior TSSP 

participation. 

To determine aggregate costs, FTA 

made the following revisions to its 

analysis. FTA is now using the hourly 

wage rate for a transit manager from the 

2016 Bureau of Labor Statistics to 

represent the average cost for personnel 

attending the training. The wage rate is 

adjusted to account for benefits and 

other employee compensation cost to 

reflect the full agency cost. The revised 

estimate also considers travel costs, 

assuming that 5 percent of required 

participants may not be able to attend 

courses locally. Furthermore, the 

Transit System Security (TSS) is 

eliminated, thus reducing the required 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
34062 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

1The TSSP has two tracks, one for rail and one 

for bus-based transport. Since the PTSCTP is 

optional for bus-based transit we do not address 

those costs or benefits in the analysis. 

2Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational 

Employment Statistics for Urban Transit Systems 

(485100), General and Operations Managers (11– 

1021), May 2014. The average hourly wage of 

$55.18 was multiplied by a benefits adjustment of 

1.56. 

training from 140 hours over three years 

to 104 hours over the same period. The 

TSS training remains available for 

participants, but is optional. 

Additionally, FTA has eliminated the 

2-hour SMS Gap course, which reduces 

the number of SMS training from 41 

hours over three years to 39 hours over 

the same period. This results in lower 

personnel training costs relative to 

PTSCTP compliance costs, but does not 

significantly reduce FTA’s cost for 

providing the training. 

For the minimum case, we continued 

with the assumption that all designated 

personnel under this program had 

already completed the required courses 

and would require only the SMS portion 

of the curriculum. This assumption is 

supported given the popularity of the 

TSSP within the industry. It is 

supported further by the level of 

voluntary participation of transit 

industry personnel obtained from 

current graduation/attendance data at 

TSI. 

For the maximum case, we continue 

with the assumption that no one subject 

to the rule has a TSSP Certificate. In this 

case, all designated personnel would 

have to take and complete both the 

TSSP (minus the TSS course) and SMS 

coursework over the allotted three-year 

period. The table below shows the 

estimated counts used in our analysis. 

To simplify the analysis, we assume that 

the total designated personnel under 

this rule would undertake one-third of 

the total coursework each year. The 

required training would be completed 

over a period of three years. 

ESTIMATED UNIVERSE OF POTENTIAL SSOA, RAIL TRANSIT AGENCY, AND FTA PERSONNEL

Minimum Maximum 

SSOA Personnel .............................................................................................................................................. 70 120 

Rail Transit Agency Personnel ........................................................................................................................ 200 340 

FTA Personnel ................................................................................................................................................. 40 40 

Total .......................................................................................................................................................... 310 500 

Next, we determined the training by 

course that would be required of each 

person within the scope of the PTSCTP. 

TSSP Curriculum 

The TSSP consists of three courses.1

The Table below lists the courses and 

duration. 

TSSP COURSEWORK REQUIRED

[Completed within a 3 year period] 

TSSP courses Hours 

Rail System Safety .......................................................................................................................................................................... 36 

Rail Incident Investigation ................................................................................................................................................................ 36 

Transit System Security (TSS) (no longer mandatory but available as a voluntary course) ......................................................... 0 

Effectively Managing Transit Emergencies ..................................................................................................................................... 32 

Total .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 104 

SMS Curriculum 

The SMS curriculum consists of two 

in-person courses and two online 

training sessions. While SSO personnel 

will be required to now take 39 hours 

of total training, rail transit agency 

personnel will no longer be required to 

take the 2 hour SMS Gap course. 

SMS COURSEWORK—IN-CLASS AND ONLINE REQUIRED

[Completed within a 3 year period] 

SMS courses Hours 

SMS Awareness .............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 

Safety Assurance ............................................................................................................................................................................. 2 

SMS Gap (no longer mandatory) .................................................................................................................................................... 0 

SMS Principles for Transit ............................................................................................................................................................... 20 

SMS Principles for SSO Programs ................................................................................................................................................. 16 

Total .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 39 

Wage Rates 

An average wage rate of $86.11 is 

assumed for those taking training under 

this program, based on 2016 Bureau of 

Labor Statistics data on average wages 

for transit managers, including an 

adjustment for benefits and other 

employee compensation costs.2 Using 

this wage assumption, we have revised 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 34063 

Lower Bound and Upper Bound costs 

for attendance as depicted in the table 

below. 

for attendance as depicted in the table 

below. 

ANNUAL COSTS FOR ATTENDANCE OF SSOA, RAIL TRANSIT AGENCY, AND FTA PERSONNEL WITHIN A 3-YEAR PERIOD

Number of 

personnel 

Hourly 

rate Training time (hours) 

Annual attendance 

costs 

(total costs divided 

by 3) 

Lower Bound Mandatory Cost/Year ........... 310 $86.11 39 SSOA-FTA, 23 RTA .............................. $255,174 

Upper Bound Mandatory Cost/Year ........... 500 86.11 143 SSOA-FTA, 127 RTA ..........................

120 ..............................................................

1,896,156 

In addition to the training 

requirements for certification, RTA 

personnel are required to attend one 

hour of training every two years to 

maintain the certification of their own 

choosing. This would add an ongoing 

annual cost of $13,347 for the minimum 

case scenario and just over $21,527 for 

the maximum case scenario. 

Travel Costs 

To allow for situations where staff are 

unable to attend local training, travel 

costs are estimated. Based on current air 

and hotel rates, and hourly wage rate of 

$86.11, transportation cost of $600 and 

lodging and meals of $250 per day and 

travel time cost of $690 for eight hours 

of travel time is estimated. It is 

unknown how many participants would 

need to travel to attend training. 

However, training is frequently 

provided by FTA across the country and 

agencies have three years in which to 

complete the training; therefore, only a 

small percentage are expected to travel. 

FTA estimated the cost assuming that 

only 5 percent of the required 

participants may travel to another 

location to attend a course out of state. 

The table below shows the annual travel 

costs for attending safety training 

courses. 

ANNUAL TRAVEL COST TO ATTEND THE TRAINING

Personnel required to travel to attend training Number of 

personnel 

Travel cost per 

person 

Total annual 

travel cost 

Lower Bound (5%) ....................................................................................................................... 4 $4,078 $18,282 

Upper Bound (5%) ....................................................................................................................... 8 11,694 89,852 

Administrative Costs 

To comply with the requirements of 

the final rule, SSOAs and RTAs will 

incur time to designate appropriate staff 

for training; seek evaluation for safety 

training previously taken to ensure 

compliance with FTA requirements; 

keep records of training completed and 

ensure certification. The total annual 

costs of these activities are estimated to 

be $212,735. The same cost estimate is 

applied to the lower and upper bound, 

although the cost would be higher for 

the lower bound since the course 

evaluation will not be needed if all 

personnel attend the new training, as 

assumed for the upper bound estimates. 

Next, we assessed costs associated 

with developing, managing, and 

administering the coursework for the 

PTSCTP. First, we reviewed the course 

catalog for TSI and determined the 

percentage of courses required by the 

PTSCTP of the total courses offered—a 

little more than one-fourth (six courses 

plus three online courses out of 21 total 

courses or about 29 percent) of the total 

course offerings would be required of 

the combined TSSP/SMS training under 

this rule. Furthermore, of the total days 

of coursework offered by TSI, 30 percent 

were attributable to the TSSP/SMS 

coursework. To be conservative, we 

used a 30 percent weighting for 

allocating fixed costs and allocated full 

costs where we were able to identify 

costs resulting from the TSSP and/or 

SMS training components. Using data 

from FTA’s budget for TSI, the cost for 

the administration of courses, contract 

costs, and costs for the development of 

new coursework, we developed the 

program costs. We factored no facility 

costs as regional transit agencies or FTA 

Regional Offices host courses. Lastly, no 

tuition fees are associated with taking 

the coursework for public agency 

employees, other than a small fee for 

course materials. 

The total cost for FTA to deliver the 

courses required under PTSTCP was 

about $1.4 million. However, since the 

TSSP training was previously provided 

prior to MAP–21, this cost is excluded 

from estimating the incremental cost of 

this rule. SMS training courses have 

been more recently developed to 

support safety goals, thus that is the 

only cost included here. 

TSI PROGRAM COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH TSSP AND SMS COURSEWORK

Contract Services ............................................................................................................................................................................ $211,600 

Equipment, Supplies, Other * ........................................................................................................................................................... 33,291 

Travel (Other than Course Delivery) * ............................................................................................................................................. 7,886 

Course Delivery ............................................................................................................................................................................... 186,744 

Indirect at 19% ................................................................................................................................................................................. 106,332 

Total Program ........................................................................................................................................................................... 665,974 

* Weighted Cost Allocation. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
34064 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

The total annual cost of providing the 

SMS training is estimated to be 

$665,974 per year. Table below shows 

the total annual cost of the final rule 

over the first three years. 

TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS FOR THE PTSCTP OVER A 3 YEAR CERTIFICATION PERIOD

SSOA and 

RTA costs TSI costs Total costs 

Aggregate COSTS MIN ............................................................................................................... $486,191 $665,974 $1,152,166 

Aggregate COSTS MAX .............................................................................................................. 2,198,743 665,974 2,864,717 

After completing the required training 

over the three-year period, RTA staff are 

required to complete an hour of 

refresher training every two years. These 

costs will incur beyond the three-year 

period discussed above. Similarly, any 

new personnel joining the agencies 

would be required to complete the 

training. To estimate the cost of training 

for the new staff, we used the rate of 

separations published in the U.S. 

Bureau of Labor Statistics monthly 

report, Job Opening and Labor 

Turnover. Using the rate of separation 

(quits, layoffs and discharges) of 1.8 

percent for State and local government 

employees, excluding education, over 

the period September 2016 to 

September 2017, we estimated the 

number of staff requiring training after 

the third year. The annual cost of the 

refresher training and the new 

personnel is about $34,000 for the 

minimum case and $83,000 for the 

maximum case beyond the first three 

years. Using a ten year period of 

analysis, the total present value cost of 

the final rule is $8.4 million at 7 percent 

discount rate for the minimum case 

scenario and $3.4 million at 7 percent 

discount rate for maximum scenario. At 

the 7 percent discount rate, the 

annualized costs are $0.48 million and 

$1.2 million for the minimum and 

maximum scenario. The annualized cost 

for the minimum and the maximum 

case, at 3 percent discount rate is $0.42 

million and $1.03 million respectively. 

Potential Benefits 

Since the interim provisions have 

been in effect for only a short time, we 

were unable to generate any estimate of 

their benefits. Thus, to assess the 

benefits for the PTSCTP, we considered 

how the training required in this 

rulemaking could strengthen the State 

Safety Oversight program, since better 

trained personnel would be expected to 

take actions that are likely to lead to 

decreased safety risks. 

While the TSSP has been available for 

some time, it was an optional 

certification that many SSOA, rail, and 

bus safety oversight personnel sought 

out of self-initiative. With the 

delineation of a mandatory pool of 

safety oversight employees, FTA hopes 

to unify and harmonize the provision of 

safety-related activities across SSOAs 

and rail transit agencies. In this way, 

this pool of employees will gain 

knowledge to identify and control 

hazards with the ultimate goal of 

decreasing incidents. Additionally, FTA 

expects that the codification of the 

PTSCTP will help promote a safety 

culture within the transit industry. This 

safety culture should help instill a 

transit agency-wide appreciation for 

shared goals, shared beliefs, best 

practices, and positive and vigilant 

attitudes towards safety. 

It may be difficult to quantify the 

effects of a positive safety culture, as a 

safety culture will develop over time. 

Characteristics of a positive safety 

culture include: Actively seeking out 

information on hazards; employee 

training; information exchanges; and 

understanding that responsibility for 

safety is shared. While the returns on 

investment in training should be fairly 

quick, establishing, promoting, and 

increasing safety in an industry that is 

already very safe is difficult to predict 

with any certainty. 

Comparison of the Cost of the Final Rule 

With the Interim Provisions 

On February 27, 2015, FTA issued a 

notice of interim safety certification 

training program provisions for Federal 

and State Safety Oversight Agency 

personnel and their contractor support 

who conduct safety audits and 

examinations of public transportation 

systems not otherwise regulated by 

another Federal agency. The proposed 

final rule will replace the provisions 

outlined in the interim notice. The 

training program outlined in this final 

rule will eliminate two requirements; 

the Transit System Security course and 

the SMS Gap online course. Rail 

security is not under FTA’s authority, so 

it is not a training requirement 

mandated by 49 U.S.C. 5329. The SMS 

Gap course requirement is eliminated 

because many of the elements of this 

course are included in the SMS 

Principles for Transit. This reduces the 

burden of the final rule compared to the 

interim provisions enacted in February 

2015. The table below shows the annual 

cost of the Interim Rule and the Final 

rule. 

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SAFETY CERTIFICATION TRAINING PROGRAM—HOURS AND COST DECREASE

Training requirements Interim rule Final rule Difference 

between rules 

Safety Management System (SMS) Gap Course (Hours) 3 ........................................................ 4 41 39 ¥2 

Transit System Security (TSS) Course (days) 5 .......................................................................... 140 104 ¥36 

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 181 143 ¥38 

Minimum Case Scenario Present Value Cost (7%) .................................................................... $3,447,233 $3,395,753 ¥$51,480 

Maximum Case Scenario Present Value Cost (7%) ................................................................... $10,022,279 $8,436,102 ¥$1,586,177 

Minimum Case Scenario Mandatory Annualized Cost (7%) ....................................................... $490,808 $483,479 ¥$7,330 

Maximum Case Scenario Annualized Cost ((7%)) ...................................................................... $1,426,947 $1,201,111 ¥$225,836 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 34065 

3FTA eliminated the ‘‘SMS Gap’’ course as part 

of the mandatory curriculum for the final rule since 

the ‘‘SMS Principles for Transit’’ course includes 

similar objectives. 4The number of hours of training for the SMS 

Principles for Rail Transit course (‘‘SMS Principles 

for Transit’’ in final rule) was incorrectly cited in 

the interim rule as 16 hours instead of 20 hours, 

this has been corrected in the final rule. 

5Based on public comment FTA eliminated the 

TSS course as part of the mandatory curriculum for 

the final rule. 

6FTA eliminated the ‘‘SMS Gap’’ course as part 

of the mandatory curriculum for the final rule since 

the ‘‘SMS Principles for Transit’’ course includes 

similar objectives. 

7The number of hours of training for the SMS 

Principles for Rail Transit course (‘‘SMS Principles 

for Transit’’ in final rule) was incorrectly cited in 

the interim rule as 16 hours instead of 20 hours, 

this has been corrected in the final rule. 

8Based on public comment FTA eliminated the 

TSS course as part of the mandatory curriculum for 

the final rule. 

Over a ten-year period, the final rule 

reduces the cost of the rule by $51,480 

at the minimum case scenario and $1.6 

million at the maximum case scenario 

using a discount rate of 7 percent. The 

annualized cost reductions of the final 

rule are $7,330 for the minimum case 

and $225,836 for the maximum case, 

using a 7 percent discount rate, 

resulting in a net benefit for the training 

participants. The reduced training 

requirements will not hinder the 

effectiveness of the safety training 

program since the participants will 

receive much of the relevant content 

through other courses or by other 

requirements, not covered under this 

rule certification requirements. 

V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices 

Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive 

Order 13272 

This rule was developed in 

accordance with Executive Order 13272 

(Proper Consideration of Small Entities 

in Agency rulemaking) and DOT’s 

policies and procedures to promote 

compliance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) 

which requires an agency to review 

regulations to assess the impact on 

small entities. In compliance with the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, FTA has 

evaluated the likely effects of the 

proposals set forth in this rule on small 

entities. This rule will apply to 

recipients of public transportation 

grants under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. 

Section 5329(e)(6) permits recipients of 

rural and urbanized area formula funds 

to use Federal funds to cover up to 80 

percent of the PTSCTP costs. 

Additionally, FTA believes many of the 

PTSCPT participants will be eligible to 

receive credit for prior safety training 

which will further reduce the cost and 

impact associated with this rulemaking. 

For these reasons, FTA certifies that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review), Executive Order 

13563 (Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review), and DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct Federal agencies to assess all 

costs and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits— 

including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and equity. 

Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, reducing costs, 

harmonizing rules, and promoting 

flexibility. 

FTA has determined this rulemaking 

is not a significant regulatory action 

within the meaning of Executive Order 

12866, Executive Order 13563, and the 

U.S. Department of Transportation’s 

regulatory policies and procedures 

(DOT Order 2100.5 dated May 22, 1980, 

44 FR 11034, Feb. 26, 1979). FTA has 

determined that this rulemaking is not 

economically significant. The proposals 

set forth in this rulemaking will not 

result in an effect on the economy of 

$100 million or more. The requirements 

set forth in the rulemaking will not 

adversely affect the economy, interfere 

with actions taken or planned by other 

agencies, or generally alter the 

budgetary impact of any entitlements, 

grants, user fees, or loan programs. 

Executive Order 13771 

As indicated in the cost-benefit 

analysis above and the summary chart 

below, this final rule is considered an 

Executive Order 13771 deregulatory 

action because it reduces the cost of 

complying with FTA’s Interim Safety 

Certification and Training Program 

(interim program) requirements 

promulgated in accordance with 49 

U.S.C. 5329(c)(2) (see 80 FR 10619). 

Training requirements Interim rule Final rule Difference 

between rules 

Safety Management System (SMS) Course (Hours) 6 ................................................................ 7 41 39 ¥2 

Transit Safety and Security (TSS) Course (days) 8 ..................................................................... 140 104 ¥36 

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 181 143 ¥38 

Minimum Case Scenario Present Value Cost (7%) .................................................................... $3,447,233 $3,395,753 ¥$51,480 

Maximum Case Scenario Present Value Cost (7%) ................................................................... $10,022,279 $8,436,102 ¥$1,586,177 

Minimum Case Scenario Mandatory Annualized Cost (7%) ....................................................... $490,808 $483,479 ¥$7,330 

Maximum Case Scenario Annualized Cost ((7%)) ...................................................................... $1,426,947 $1,201,111 ¥$225,836 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

This rulemaking would not impose 

unfunded mandates as defined by the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Pub. L. 104–4, March 22, 1995, 109 

Stat. 48). The cost of training to comply 

with this rule is an eligible expenditure 

of Federal financial assistance provided 

to recipients under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 

53. This rulemaking will not result in 

the expenditure by State, local, and 

tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

by the private sector, of $155 million or 

more in any one year. 

Executive Order 12372 

(Intergovernmental Review) 

The regulations effectuating Executive 

Order 12372 regarding 

intergovernmental consultation on 

Federal programs and activities were 

applied during this rulemaking. 

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

This rulemaking has been analyzed in 

accordance with the principles and 

criteria established by Executive Order 

13132, and FTA has determined that 

this rulemaking would not have 

sufficient Federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a Federalism 

assessment. FTA has also concluded 

that this rulemaking would not preempt 

any State law or State regulation or 

affect the States’ abilities to discharge 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
34066 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

traditional State governmental 

functions. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

In compliance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.; ‘‘PRA’’) and the OMB regulation 

at 5 CFR 1320.8(d), FTA is seeking 

approval from OMB for the Information 

Collection Request abstracted below. In 

order to comply with the requirements 

to implement the PTSCTP in accordance 

with 49 U.S.C. 5329(c)(1), this 

rulemaking requires recipients to 

provide information to FTA regarding 

the participation of their respective 

designated personnel as abstracted 

below. Designated personnel would 

provide enrollment information, 

periodically update compliance with 

PTSCTP training requirements, and 

where applicable, submit supporting 

documentation of prior training for 

credit towards PTSCTP training 

requirements. All recipients of 

mandatory PTSCTP requirements would 

annually certify compliance with the 

PTSCTP requirements. Additionally, 

SSOAs would be required to develop 

annual technical training plans for FTA 

approval. The plans would support the 

SSOA requirement to demonstrate that 

applicable SSOA personnel are 

qualified to perform safety audits and 

examinations. 

The information collection would be 

different for each type of recipient 

(Federal government personnel, Federal 

contractors, SSOAs and their 

contractors, and rail transit agencies). 

Therefore, the paperwork burden would 

vary. For example, the burden on 

SSOAs would be proportionate to the 

number of rail transit agencies within 

that State, and the size and complexity 

of those rail transit systems. This would 

affect the number of personnel 

designated for participation. FTA 

proposes to bear the cost associated 

with the development and maintenance 

of the website. 

Type of Review: OMB Clearance. New 

information collection request. 

Respondents: Currently there are 30 

States with 60 rail fixed guideway 

public transportation systems in 

engineering, construction, and 

operations. The PRA estimate is based 

on participation in the PTSCTP by a 

total of 30 States and 60 rail transit 

agencies. In addition, we estimate 

participation by 35–45 SSOA 

contractors and approximately 30 

Federal personnel and contractors. 

Frequency: Information will be 

collected through the website on an 

ongoing basis throughout the year. 

Participants must complete training 

requirements within 3 years and 

refresher training every 2 years. 

Certification of compliance will be 

required annually. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: In the first year of the program, 

we estimate a total burden of between 

5,209 (minimum) and 5,909 (maximum) 

hours, depending on how many 

individuals are required to participate. 

Annually, each SSOA would devote 

between 88–91 hours to information 

collection activities including the 

development and submission of training 

plans to FTA. SSOA contractors would 

devote approximately 140–180 hours to 

information collection activities. These 

activities would have a combined total 

of 2,780–2,920 hours, depending on 

how many individuals are required to 

participate. The mandatory participants 

affected by 49 U.S.C. 5329(c)(1) and 

today’s rulemaking include 60 rail fixed 

guideway public transportation systems 

which would spend an estimated 

annual total of between 2,060 

(minimum) and 2,620 (maximum) hours 

on information collection activities in 

the first year, or approximately 34–44 

hours each. Finally, FTA is expected to 

expend approximately 249 hours in 

furtherance of the PTSCTP in the first 

year, and Federal contractors will spend 

an estimated four (4) hours each, for a 

combined total of approximately 369 

hours in the first year. For this rule, 

OMB has issued control number 2132– 

0578. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

The National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) 

requires Federal agencies to analyze the 

potential environmental effects of their 

proposed actions in the form of a 

categorical exclusion, environmental 

assessment, or environmental impact 

statement. This rulemaking is 

categorically excluded under FTA’s 

environmental impact procedure at 23 

CFR 771.118(c)(4), pertaining to 

planning and administrative activities 

that do not involve or lead directly to 

construction, such as the promulgation 

of rules, regulations, and directives. 

FTA has determined that no unusual 

circumstances exist in this instance, and 

that a categorical exclusion is 

appropriate for this rulemaking. 

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of 

Private Property) 

This rulemaking will not affect a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630. 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations) 

Executive Order 12898 directs every 

Federal agency to make environmental 

justice part of its mission by identifying 

and addressing the effects of all 

programs, policies, and activities on 

minority populations and low-income 

populations. The USDOT environmental 

justice initiatives accomplish this goal 

by involving the potentially affected 

public in developing transportation 

projects that fit harmoniously within 

their communities without 

compromising safety or mobility. 

Additionally, FTA has issued a program 

circular addressing environmental 

justice in public transportation, 

C 4703.1, Environmental Justice Policy 

Guidance for Federal Transit 

Administration Recipients. This circular 

provides a framework for FTA grantees 

as they integrate principles of 

environmental justice into their transit 

decision-making processes. The Circular 

includes recommendations for State 

Departments of Transportation, 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations, 

and public transportation systems on (1) 

How to fully engage environmental 

justice populations in the transportation 

decision-making process; (2) How to 

determine whether environmental 

justice populations would be subjected 

to disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

of a public transportation project, 

policy, or activity; and (3) How to avoid, 

minimize, or mitigate these effects. 

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 

Reform) 

This action meets the applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988 to minimize 

litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and 

reduce burden. 

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of 

Children) 

FTA has analyzed this rulemaking 

under Executive Order 13045. FTA 

certifies that this rule will not cause an 

environmental risk to health or safety 

that may disproportionately affect 

children. 

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal 

Consultation) 

FTA has analyzed this rulemaking 

under Executive Order 13175 and finds 

that the action will not have substantial 

direct effects on one or more Indian 

tribes; will not impose substantial direct 

compliance costs on Indian tribal 

governments; will not preempt tribal 

laws; and will not impose any new 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 34067 

consultation requirements on Indian 

tribal governments. Therefore, a tribal 

summary impact statement is not 

required. 

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) 

FTA has analyzed this rulemaking 

under Executive Order 13211 and has 

determined that this action is not a 

significant energy action under the 

Executive Order, given that the action is 

not likely to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy. Therefore, a Statement of 

Energy Effects is not required. 

Privacy Act 

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), 

U.S. DOT solicits comments from the 

public to better inform its rulemaking 

process. U.S. DOT posts these 

comments, without edit, including any 

personal information the commenter 

provides, to www.regulations.gov, as 

described in the system of records 

notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can 

be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. 

Statutory/Legal Authority for This 

Rulemaking 

This rulemaking is issued under the 

authority of 49 U.S.C. 5329(c)(1) as 

amended, which requires the Secretary 

of Transportation to prescribe a public 

transportation safety certification 

training program for Federal and State 

employees, and other designated 

personnel, who conduct safety audits 

and examinations of public 

transportation systems and employees 

of public transportation agencies 

directly responsible for safety oversight. 

The Secretary is authorized to issue 

regulations to carry out the general 

provisions of this statutory requirement 

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5329(f)(7). 

Regulation Identification Number 

A regulation identification number 

(RIN) is assigned to each regulatory 

action listed in the Unified Agenda of 

Federal Regulations. The Regulatory 

Information Service Center publishes 

the Unified Agenda in April and 

October of each year. The RIN set forth 

in the heading can be used to crossreference this action with the Unified 

Agenda. 

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 672 

Mass transportation, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Safety, 

Transportation. 

K. Jane Williams, 

Acting Administrator. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, and under the authority of 49 

U.S.C. 5329(c), 5329(f), and the 

delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.91, 

FTA hereby amends Chapter VI of Title 

49, Code of Federal Regulations, by 

adding part 672 to read as follows: 

PART 672—PUBLIC 

TRANSPORTATION SAFETY 

CERTIFICATION TRAINING PROGRAM 

Subpart A—General Provisions 

Sec. 

672.1 Purpose. 

672.3 Scope and applicability. 

672.5 Definitions. 

Subpart B—Training Requirements 

672.11 Designated personnel who conduct 

safety audits and examinations. 

672.13 Designated personnel of public 

transportation agencies. 

672.15 Evaluation of prior certification and 

training. 

Subpart C—Administrative Requirements 

672.21 Records. 

672.23 Availability of records. 

Subpart D—Compliance and Certification 

Requirements 

672.31 Requirement to certify compliance. 

Appendix A to Part 672—Public 

Transportation Safety Certification 

Training Program 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5329(c) and (f), and 

49 CFR 1.91. 

Subpart A—General Provisions 

§ 672.1 Purpose. 

(a) This part implements a uniform 

safety certification training curriculum 

and requirements to enhance the 

technical proficiency of individuals 

who conduct safety audits and 

examinations of public transportation 

systems operated by public 

transportation agencies and those who 

are directly responsible for safety 

oversight of public transportation 

agencies. 

(b) This part does not preempt any 

safety certification training 

requirements required by a State for 

public transportation agencies within its 

jurisdiction. 

§ 672.3 Scope and applicability. 

(a) In general, this part applies to all 

recipients of Federal financial assistance 

under 49 U.S.C. chapter 53. 

(b) The mandatory requirements of 

this part will apply only to State Safety 

Oversight Agency personnel and 

contractors that conduct safety audits 

and examinations of rail fixed guideway 

public transportation systems, and 

designated personnel and contractors 

who are directly responsible for the 

safety oversight of a recipient’s rail fixed 

guideway public transportation systems. 

(c) Other FTA recipients may 

participate voluntarily in accordance 

with this part. 

§ 672.5 Definitions. 

As used in this part: 

Administrator means the Federal 

Transit Administrator or the 

Administrator’s designee. 

Contractor means an entity that 

performs tasks on behalf of FTA, a State 

Safety Oversight Agency, or public 

transportation agency through contract 

or other agreement. 

Designated personnel means: 

(1) Employees and contractors 

identified by a recipient whose job 

function is directly responsible for 

safety oversight of the public 

transportation system of the public 

transportation agency; or 

(2) Employees and contractors of a 

State Safety Oversight Agency whose 

job function requires them to conduct 

safety audits and examinations of the 

rail fixed guideway public 

transportation systems subject to the 

jurisdiction of the agency. 

Directly responsible for safety 

oversight means public transportation 

agency personnel whose primary job 

function includes the development, 

implementation and review of the 

agency’s safety plan, and/or the SSOA 

requirements for the rail fixed guideway 

public transportation system pursuant 

to 49 CFR parts 659 or 674. 

Examination means a process for 

gathering or analyzing facts or 

information related to the safety of a 

public transportation system. 

FTA means the Federal Transit 

Administration. 

Public transportation agency means 

an entity that provides public 

transportation service as defined in 49 

U.S.C. 5302 and that has one or more 

modes of service not subject to the 

safety oversight requirements of another 

Federal agency. 

Rail fixed guideway public 

transportation system means any fixed 

guideway system as defined in § 674.7 

of this chapter. 

Recipient means a State or local 

governmental authority, or any other 

operator of a public transportation 

system receiving financial assistance 

under 49 U.S.C. chapter 53. 

Safety audit means a review or 

analysis of safety records and related 

materials, including, but not limited to, 

those related to financial accounts. 

State means a State of the United 

States, the District of Columbia, Puerto 

Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, 

Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin 

Islands. 

State Safety Oversight Agency (SSOA) 

means an agency established by a State 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
34068 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

that meets the requirements and 

performs the functions specified by 49 

U.S.C. 5329(e) and the regulations set 

forth in 49 CFR parts 659 and 674. 

Subpart B—Training Requirements 

§ 672.11 Designated personnel who 

conduct safety audits and examinations. 

(a) Each SSOA shall designate its 

personnel and contractors who conduct 

safety audits and examinations of public 

transportation systems, including 

appropriate managers and supervisors of 

such personnel, that must comply with 

the applicable training requirements of 

Appendix A to this part. 

(b) Designated personnel shall 

complete applicable training 

requirements of this part within three 

(3) years of their initial designation. 

Thereafter, refresher training shall be 

completed every two (2) years. The 

SSOA shall determine refresher training 

requirements which must include, at a 

minimum, one (1) hour of safety 

oversight training. 

§ 672.13 Designated personnel of public 

transportation agencies. 

(a) Each recipient that operates a rail 

fixed guideway public transportation 

system shall designate its personnel and 

contractors who are directly responsible 

for safety oversight and ensure their 

compliance with the applicable training 

requirements set forth in Appendix A to 

this part. 

(b) Each recipient that operates a bus 

or other public transportation system 

not subject to the safety oversight of 

another Federal agency may designate 

its personnel who are directly 

responsible for safety oversight to 

participate in the applicable training 

requirements as set forth in Appendix A 

to this part. 

(c) Personnel designated under 

paragraph (a) of this section shall 

complete applicable training 

requirements of this part within three 

(3) years of their initial designation. 

Thereafter, refresher training shall be 

completed every two (2) years. The 

recipient shall determine refresher 

training requirements which must 

include, at a minimum, one (1) hour of 

safety oversight training. 

§ 672.15 Evaluation of prior certification 

and training. 

(a) Designated personnel subject to 

this part may request that FTA evaluate 

safety training or certification 

previously obtained from another entity 

to determine if the training satisfies an 

applicable training requirement of this 

part. 

(b) Designated personnel must 

provide FTA with an official transcript 

or certificate of the training, a 

description of the curriculum and 

competencies obtained, and a brief 

statement detailing how the training or 

certification satisfies the applicable 

requirements of this part. 

(c) FTA will evaluate the submission 

and determine if a training requirement 

of this part may be waived. If a waiver 

is granted, designated personnel are 

responsible for completing all other 

applicable requirements of this part. 

Subpart C—Administrative 

Requirements. 

§ 672.21 Records. 

(a) General requirement. Each 

recipient shall ensure that its designated 

personnel are enrolled in the PTSCTP. 

Each recipient shall ensure that 

designated personnel update their 

individual training record as he or she 

completes the applicable training 

requirements of this part. 

(b) SSOA requirement. Each SSOA 

shall retain a record of the technical 

training completed by its designated 

personnel in accordance with the 

technical training requirements of 

Appendix A to this part. Such records 

shall be retained by the SSOA for at 

least five (5) years from the date the 

record is created. 

§ 672.23 Availability of records. 

(a) Except as required by law, or 

expressly authorized or required by this 

part, a recipient may not release 

information pertaining to designated 

personnel that is required by this part 

without the written consent of the 

designated personnel. 

(b) Designated personnel are entitled, 

upon written request to the recipient, to 

obtain copies of any records pertaining 

to his or her training required by this 

part. The recipient shall promptly 

provide the records requested by 

designated personnel and access shall 

not be contingent upon the recipient’s 

receipt of payment for the production of 

such records. 

(c) A recipient shall permit access to 

all facilities utilized and records 

compiled in accordance with the 

requirements of this part to the 

Secretary of Transportation, the Federal 

Transit Administration, or any State 

agency with jurisdiction over public 

transportation safety oversight of the 

recipient. 

(d) When requested by the National 

Transportation Safety Board as part of 

an accident investigation, a recipient 

shall disclose information related to the 

training of designated personnel. 

Subpart D—Compliance and 

Certification Requirements 

§ 672.31 Requirement to certify 

compliance. 

(a) A recipient of FTA financial 

assistance described in § 672.3(b) shall 

annually certify compliance with this 

part in accordance with FTA’s 

procedures for annual grant certification 

and assurances. 

(b) A certification must be authorized 

by the recipient’s governing board or 

other authorizing official, and must be 

signed by a party specifically authorized 

to do so. 

Appendix A to Part 672—Public 

Transportation Safety Certification 

Training Program 

A. Required Curriculum Over a Three-Year 

Period 

(1) FTA/SSOA personnel and contractor 

support, and public transportation agency 

personnel with direct responsibility for safety 

oversight of rail fixed guideway public 

transportation systems: 

(a) One (1) hour course on SMS 

Awareness—e-learning delivery (all required 

participants) 

(b) Two (2) hour courses on Safety 

Assurance—e-learning delivery (all required 

participants) 

(c) Twenty (20) hours on SMS Principles 

for Transit (all required participants) 

(d) Sixteen (16) hours on SMS Principles 

for SSO Programs (FTA/SSOA/contractor 

support personnel only) 

(e) TSSP curriculum (minus Transit 

System Security (TSS) course) (all required 

participants—credit will be provided if 

participant has a Course Completion 

Certificate of previously taken TSSP courses) 

(i) Rail System Safety (36 hours) 

(ii) Effectively Managing Transit 

Emergencies (32 hours) 

(iii) Rail Incident Investigation (36 hours) 

(2) FTA/SSOA/contractor support 

personnel (technical training component): 

(a) Each SSOA shall develop a technical 

training plan for designated personnel and 

contractor support personnel who perform 

safety audits and examinations. The SSOA 

will submit its proposed technical training 

plan to FTA for review and evaluation as part 

of the SSOA certification program in 

accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(e)(7). This 

review and approval process will support the 

consultation required between FTA and 

SSOAs regarding the staffing and 

qualification of the SSOAs’ employees and 

other designated personnel in accordance 

with 49 U.S.C. 5329(e)(3)(D). 

(b) Recognizing that each rail fixed 

guideway public transportation system has 

unique characteristics, each SSOA will 

identify the tasks related to inspections, 

examinations, and audits, and all activities 

requiring sign-off, which must be performed 

by the SSOA to carry out its safety oversight 

requirements, and identify the skills and 

knowledge necessary to perform each task at 

that system. At a minimum, the technical 

training plan will describe the process for 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 34069 

receiving technical training in the following 

competency areas appropriate to the specific 

rail fixed guideway public transportation 

system(s) for which safety audits and 

examinations are conducted: 

(i) Agency organizational structure 

(ii) System Safety Program Plan and 

Security Program Plan 

(iii) Knowledge of agency: 

(I) Territory and revenue service schedules 

(II) Current bulletins, general orders, and 

other associated directives that ensure safe 

operations 

(III) Operations and maintenance rule 

books 

(IV) Safety rules 

(V) Standard Operating Procedures 

(VI) Roadway Worker Protection 

(VII) Employee Hours of Service and 

Fatigue Management program 

(VIII) Employee Observation and Testing 

Program (Efficiency Testing) 

(IX) Employee training and certification 

requirements 

(X) Vehicle inspection and maintenance 

programs, schedules and records 

(XI) Track inspection and maintenance 

programs, schedules and records 

(XII) Tunnels, bridges, and other structures 

inspection and maintenance programs, 

schedules and records 

(XIII) Traction power (substation, overhead 

catenary system, and third rail), load 

dispatching, inspection and maintenance 

programs, schedules and records 

(XIV) Signal and train control inspection 

and maintenance programs, schedules and 

records 

(c) The SSOA will determine the length of 

time for the technical training based on the 

skill level of the designated personnel 

relative to the applicable rail transit 

agency(s). FTA will provide a template as 

requested to assist the SSOA with preparing 

and monitoring its technical training plan 

and will provide technical assistance as 

requested. Each SSOA technical training plan 

that is submitted to FTA for review will: 

(i) Require designated personnel to 

successfully: 

(I) Complete training that covers the skills 

and knowledge needed to effectively perform 

the tasks. 

(II) Pass a written and/or oral examination 

covering the skills and knowledge required 

for the designated personnel to effectively 

perform his or her tasks. 

(III) Demonstrate hands-on capability to 

perform his or her tasks to the satisfaction of 

the appropriate SSOA supervisor or 

designated instructor. 

(ii) Establish equivalencies or written and 

oral examinations to allow designated 

personnel to demonstrate that they possess 

the skill and qualification required to 

perform their tasks. 

(iii) Require biennial refresher training to 

maintain technical skills and abilities which 

includes classroom and hands-on training, as 

well as testing. Observation and evaluation of 

actual performance of duties may be used to 

meet the hands-on portion of this 

requirement, provided that such testing is 

documented. 

(iv) Require that training records be 

maintained to demonstrate the current 

qualification status of designated personnel 

assigned to carry out the oversight program. 

Records may be maintained either 

electronically or in writing and must be 

provided to FTA upon request. 

(v) Records must include the following 

information concerning each designated 

personnel: 

(I) Name; 

(II) The title and date each training course 

was completed and the proficiency test 

score(s) where applicable; 

(III) The content of each training course 

successfully completed; 

(IV) A description of the designated 

personnel’s hands-on performance applying 

the skills and knowledge required to perform 

the tasks that the employee will be 

responsible for performing and the factual 

basis supporting the determination; 

(V) The tasks the designated personnel are 

deemed qualified to perform; and 

(VI) Provide the date that the designated 

personnel’s status as qualified to perform the 

tasks expires, and the date in which biennial 

refresher training is due. 

(vi) Ensure the qualification of contractors 

performing oversight activities. SSOAs may 

use demonstrations, previous training and 

education, and written and oral examinations 

to determine if contractors possess the skill 

and qualification required to perform their 

tasks. 

(vii) Periodically assess the effectiveness of 

the technical training. One method of 

validation and assessment could be through 

the use of efficiency tests or periodic review 

of employee performance. 

B. Voluntary Curriculum 

Bus transit system personnel with direct 

safety oversight responsibility and State 

DOTs overseeing safety programs for 

subrecipients: 

(a) SMS Awareness—e-learning delivery 

(b) Safety Assurance—e-learning delivery 

(c) SMS Principles for Transit 

(d) Courses offered through the TSSP 

Certificate (Bus) 

i. Effectively Managing Transit 

Emergencies 

ii. Transit Bus System Safety 

iii. Fundamentals of Bus Collision 

Investigation 

[FR Doc. 2018–15168 Filed 7–18–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES