May 28, 2013, FR Notice (60-Day)

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2013 / Notices

32005

Page/reference of
OOIDA comment

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Reply: Regarding law enforcement use (or non-use) of EOBRs, members of law enforcement are currently not included
in the survey plan as respondents, but drivers’ experiences with them are. Drivers with EOBRs are asked the following two questions:
Have you ever had a problem producing your electronic hours-of-service records for a law enforcement officer?
If so, was this problem big enough that you felt harassed by the request to see your records?
Carriers are not asked this pair of questions.

OOIDA also expressed a concern
regarding measures to prevent carriers
from harassing drivers through the use
of EOBRs. The qualitative
questionnaires for both carriers and
drivers ask participants what could be
done to prevent this, either through the
technology itself or in processes
surrounding EOBR usage. Additionally,
the issue is addressed in the
quantitative surveys. Carriers and
drivers are asked to identify (from a list)
actions which they think are ‘‘good
ideas’’ to prevent carriers from harassing
their drivers. In addition, carriers and
drivers are asked what FMCSA actions
would be appropriate in response to
carrier harassment. For specific
examples of relevant questions
regarding mitigation see: Qualitative,
Carriers: 18b, 19; Qualitative, Drivers:
18; Quantitative, Carriers: 26, 27; and
Quantitative, Drivers: 32, 33.
No party requested a copy of the
survey instruments and associated
documents before their submission.
These documents were, however,
available upon request as stated in the
60-day notice (77 FR 74267, Dec. 13,
2012). Should FMCSA receive a request
for these instruments or documents,
FMCSA will post them in the docket for
this ICR to ensure broad public access.
FMCSA will publish a SNPRM on
EOBRs and will consider survey results
concerning the EOBR use by motor
carriers to ensure that EOBRs are not
used by carriers to harass or coerce
drivers prior to the issuance of a final
rule.
Public Comments Invited: You are
asked to comment on any aspect of this
information collection, including the
following: (1) Whether the proposed
collection is necessary for FMCSA to
perform its functions; (2) the accuracy of
the estimated burden; (3) ways for
FMCSA to enhance the quality,
usefulness, and clarity of the collected
information; and 4) ways that the
burden could be minimized without
reducing the quality of the collected
information.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:46 May 24, 2013

Jkt 229001

Issued on: May 20, 2013.
Dr. G. Kelly Leone,
Associate Administrator, Office of Research
and Information Technology and Chief
Information Officer.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

to Ms. Toone at [email protected].
Please refer to the assigned OMB control
number and the title of the information
collection in any correspondence
submitted. FRA will summarize
comments received in response to this
notice in a subsequent notice and
include them in its information
collection submission to OMB for
approval.

Federal Railroad Administration

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

[FR Doc. 2013–12564 Filed 5–24–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P

[Docket No. FRA 2013–0002–N–12]

Agency Information Collection
Activities; Comment Request
Federal Railroad
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and
its implementing regulations, the
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)
hereby announces that it is seeking reapproval of the following information
collection activities that were
previously approved by OMB under
Emergency Clearance Procedures.
Before submitting these information
collection requirements for clearance by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), FRA is soliciting public
comment on specific aspects of the
activities identified below.
DATES: Comments must be received no
later than July 29, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments
on any or all of the following proposed
activities by mail to either: Mr. Robert
Brogan, Office of Safety, RRS–21,
Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE., Mail Stop 17,
Washington, DC 20590, or Ms. Kimberly
Toone, Office of Information
Technology, RAD–20, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave.
SE., Mail Stop 35, Washington, DC
20590. Commenters requesting FRA to
acknowledge receipt of their respective
comments must include a self-addressed
stamped postcard stating, ‘‘Comments
on OMB control number 2130–lll.’’
Alternatively, comments may be
transmitted via facsimile to (202) 493–
6216 or (202) 493–6497, or via email to
Mr. Brogan at [email protected], or

PO 00000

Frm 00122

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Mr.
Robert Brogan, Office of Safety, RRS–21,
Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE., Mail Stop 17,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202)
493–6292) or Ms. Kimberly Toone,
Office of Information Technology, RAD–
20, Federal Railroad Administration,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Mail Stop 35,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202)
493–6132). (These telephone numbers
are not toll-free.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Public Law 104–13, § 2, 109 Stat.
163 (1995) (codified as revised at 44
U.S.C. 3501–3520), and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part
1320, require Federal agencies to
provide 60-days notice to the public for
comment on information collection
activities before seeking approval of
such activities by OMB. 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A); 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1),
1320.10(e)(1), 1320.12(a). Specifically,
FRA invites interested respondents to
comment on the following summary of
proposed information collection
activities regarding (i) whether the
information collection activities are
necessary for FRA to properly execute
its functions, including whether the
activities will have practical utility; (ii)
the accuracy of FRA’s estimates of the
burden of the information collection
activities, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used to
determine the estimates; (iii) ways for
FRA to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information being
collected; and (iv) ways for FRA to
minimize the burden of information
collection activities on the public by
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology (e.g., permitting electronic

E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM

28MYN1

32006

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2013 / Notices

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

submission of responses). See 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)(I)–(iv); 5 CFR
1320.8(d)(1)(I)–(iv). FRA believes that
soliciting public comment will promote
its efforts to reduce the administrative
and paperwork burdens associated with
the collection of information mandated
by Federal regulations. In summary,
FRA reasons that comments received
will advance three objectives: (i) reduce
reporting burdens; (ii) ensure that it
organizes information collection
requirements in a ‘‘user friendly’’ format
to improve the use of such information;
and (iii) accurately assess the resources
expended to retrieve and produce
information requested. See 44 U.S.C.
3501.
Below is a brief summary of the
information collection activities that
FRA will submit for renewed clearance
by OMB as required under the PRA:
Title: Notice of Funding Availability
and Solicitation of Applications for
Grants under the Railroad Safety
Technology Grant Program.
OMB Control Number: 2130–0587.
Abstract: The Rail Safety Technology
Program is a newly authorized program
under the Rail Safety Improvement Act
of 2008 (RSIA) (Pub. L. 110–432;
October 16, 2008). The program was
directed by Congress and passed into

law in the aftermath of a series of major
rail accidents that culminated in an
accident at Chatsworth, California, in
2008. Twenty-five people were killed
and 135 people were injured in the
Chatsworth accident. This event turned
the Nation’s attention to rail safety and
the possibility that new technologies,
such as PTC, could prevent such
accidents in the future. The RSIA
ordered installation of PTC by all Class
I railroads on any of their mainlines
carrying poisonous inhalation hazard
(PIH) materials and by all passenger and
commuter railroads on their main lines
not later than December 31, 2015.
As part of the RSIA, Congress
provided $50 million to FRA to award,
in one or more grants, to eligible
projects by passenger and freight rail
carriers, railroad suppliers, and State
and local Governments. Although no
funds are available for FY 2014, funds
were awarded to seven projects that
have a public benefit of improved
railroad safety and efficiency, with
priority given to projects that make PTC
technologies interoperable between
railroad systems; projects that accelerate
the deployment of PTC technology on
high-risk corridors, such as those that
have high volumes of hazardous
material shipments; and for projects

over which commuter or passenger
trains operate, or that benefit both
passenger and freight safety and
efficiency.
Funds provided under this grant
program could constitute a maximum of
80 percent of the total cost of a selected
project, with a minimum of 20 percent
of costs funded from other sources. The
funding provided under these grants is
being made available to grantees on a
reimbursement basis. Funding made
available through grants provided under
this program, together with funding
from other sources that is committed by
a grantee as part of a grant agreement,
needs to be sufficient to complete the
funded project and achieve the
anticipated technology development.
FRA expects that the seven projects
awarded grants will be completed over
the next three years. FRA is continuing
to collect information from grantees
until all seven projects have been
completed.
Form Number(s): FRA F 6180.146;
SF–269; SF–270.
Affected Public: Businesses.
Respondent Universe: 7 Railroads.
Frequency of Submission: On
occasion.
Reporting Burden:

Grant program

Respondent universe

Total annual responses

Average time per
response

Meeting requests with FRA Associate Administrator (FRA).
Face to Face Meetings with Associate Admin. (FRA).
Revisions to Grant Applications
(HHS).
Execution Process (Progress Reports) (FRA).
Close-Out Procedures:
Close Out Documents (HHS)
Final Technical Reports (FRA)

7 Railroads/Grant Awardees ........

7 meeting requests .......................

30 minutes .........

4

7 Railroads/Grant Awardees ........

7 project meetings ........................

2 hours ..............

14

7 Railroads/Grant Awardees ........

7 grant application revisions .........

40 hours ............

280

7 Railroads/Grant Awardees ........

84 progress reports ......................

1 hour ................

84

7 Railroads/Grant Awardees ........
7 Railroads/Grant Awardees ........

7 close-out documents .................
7 reports .......................................

4 hours ..............
80 hours ............

28
560

Total Responses: 119.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: 970
hours (FRA Burden = 662 hours; HHS
Burden = 308 hours).
Status: Re-Approval under Regular
Clearance Procedures.
Title: State Highway-Rail Grade
Crossing Action Plans.
OMB Control Number: 2130–0589.
Abstract: Section 202 of the Rail
Safety Improvement Act (RSIA) of 2008
required the Secretary of Transportation
(delegated to the Federal Railroad
Administrator by 49 CFR 1.49) to
identify the 10 States that have had the
most-highway-rail grade crossing
collisions, on average, over the past
three years, and to require those States
to develop State highway-rail grade
crossing action plans, within a

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:46 May 24, 2013

Jkt 229001

reasonable period of time, as
determined by the Secretary. Section
202 of the law further provided that
these plans must identify specific
solutions for improving safety at
crossings, including highway-rail grade
crossing closures or grade separations,
and must focus on crossings that have
experienced multiple accidents or are at
high risk for such accidents.
Section 202 also provided the
following: The Secretary will provide
assistance to the States in developing
and carrying out such plans, as
appropriate; the plans may be
coordinated with other State or Federal
planning requirements; the plans will
cover a period of time determined to be
appropriate by the Secretary; and the
Secretary may condition the awarding of

PO 00000

Frm 00123

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Total annual
burden hours

any grants under 49 U.S.C. 20158,
20167, or 22501, to a State identified
under this section, on the development
of such State’s plan.
Lastly, Section 202 provided a review
and approval process under which, not
later than 60 days after the Secretary
receives such a State action plan, the
Secretary must review and either
approve or disapprove it. In the event
that the proposed plan is disapproved,
Section 202 indicates that the Secretary
must notify the affected State as to the
specific areas in which the proposed
plan is deficient, and the State must
correct all deficiencies within 30 days
following receipt of written notice from
the Secretary.
FRA uses the collection of
information to ensure that States meet

E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM

28MYN1

32007

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2013 / Notices
the Congressional mandate and devise
and implement suitable plans to reduce/
eliminate troublingly high numbers of
highway-rail grade collisions in their
States. FRA reviews grade these crossing
action plans and grade crossing action
plan revisions to ensure that these plans
include the following: (1) Identify

Form Number(s): N/A.
Affected Public: States.
Respondent Universe: 10 States.
Frequency of Submission: On
occasion.
Reporting Burden:
Average time
per response
(hours)

Total annual
burden hours

CFR section

Respondent universe

Total annual responses

234.11—State Highway-Rail Grade
Crossing Action Plans.
—Revised Grade Crossing Action
Plans After FRA Review.

10 States ........................................

10 plans .........................................

600

6,000

10 States ........................................

5 plans ...........................................

80

600

Total Responses: 15.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
6,400 hours.
Type of Request: Re-Approval of a
Currently Approved Information
Collection.
Status: Regular Review.
Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5
CFR 1320.5(b), 1320.8(b)(3)(vi), FRA
informs all interested parties that it may
not conduct or sponsor, and a
respondent is not required to respond
to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 20,
2013.
Rebecca Pennington,
Chief Financial Officer, Federal Railroad
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013–12436 Filed 5–24–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Environmental Impact Statement for
Tulsa—Oklahoma City Passenger Rail
Corridor, Oklahoma, Lincoln, Creek,
and Tulsa Counties, OK
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
AGENCY:

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

specific solutions for improving safety
at highway-rail grade crossings,
including highway-rail grade crossing
closures or grade separations, (2) Focus
on crossings that have experienced
multiple accidents or are at high risk for
such accidents, and (3) Cover a five-year
period of time.

SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this notice to
advise the public that FRA and the
Oklahoma Department of Transportation
(ODOT) Rail Division intend to prepare
an EIS pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) for the State of Oklahoma HighSpeed Rail Initiative: Tulsa—Oklahoma
City Passenger Rail Corridor Investment
Plan in Oklahoma, Lincoln, Creek, and
Tulsa counties, Oklahoma. The EIS will
evaluate passenger rail alternatives for

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:46 May 24, 2013

Jkt 229001

the approximately 106-mile corridor
between Tulsa and Oklahoma City,
which currently has no passenger rail
service. This corridor is part of the
South Central High Speed Rail Corridor
and is a federally-designated high-speed
rail (HSR) corridor. ODOT envisions the
Tulsa—Oklahoma City passenger rail
corridor to be a new, dedicated HSR line
for the majority of its length.
FRA invites the public,
governmental agencies, and all other
interested parties to comment on the
scope of the EIS. All such comments
should be provided in writing, within
thirty (30) days of the publication of this
notice, at the address listed below.
Comments may also be provided orally
or in writing at the scoping meetings for
the Project. Scoping meeting dates,
times and locations, in addition to
related Project information can be found
online at
www.TulsaOKCRailCorridor.com.

DATES:

Written comments on the
scope of the EIS may be mailed or
emailed within thirty (30) days of the
publication of this notice to Catherine
Dobbs, Transportation Industry Analyst,
Office of Railroad Policy and
Development, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, or
[email protected]; or Johnson
Bridgwater, Federal Programs Manager,
Oklahoma Department of Transportation
Rail Division, 200 NE. 21st Street,
Oklahoma City, OK 73105–3204.

ADDRESSES:

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Catherine Dobbs, Transportation
Industry Analyst, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington 20590,
telephone (202) 493–6347,
[email protected], or Johnson
Bridgwater, Federal Programs Manager,
Oklahoma Department of Transportation
Rail Division, 200 NE. 21st Street,

PO 00000

Frm 00124

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Oklahoma City, OK 73105–3204,
telephone (405) 521–4203.
Environmental Review Process: The
EIS will be prepared in accordance with
the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 (NEPA), the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ)
regulations implementing NEPA and the
FRA’s Procedures for Considering
Environmental Impacts as set forth in 64
FR 28545 dated May 26, 1999
(Environmental Procedures). The EIS
will also address Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act,
Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of
Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C.
303) and other applicable Federal and
state laws and regulations. The study
will result in a NEPA document that
will address overall issues of concern,
including but not limited to:
• Describing the purpose and need for
the proposed action.
• Describing the environment likely
to be affected by the proposed action.
• Developing evaluation criteria to
identify alternatives that meet the
purpose and need of the proposed
action.
• Identifying the range of reasonable
alternatives that satisfy the purpose and
need for the proposed action.
• Developing the no-build alternative
to serve as a baseline for comparison.
• Describing and evaluating the
potential environmental impacts and
mitigation associated with the proposed
alternatives.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Federal Railroad Administration, in
cooperation with the Oklahoma
Department of Transportation (ODOT),
will prepare the EIS for the State of
Oklahoma High-Speed Rail Initiative:
Tulsa—Oklahoma City Passenger Rail
Corridor Investment Plan. The proposed
route would begin in Oklahoma City at
the Santa Fe Depot and proceed easterly
toward Tulsa, terminating at the Union
Station in Tulsa. This route is an

E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM

28MYN1