July 7, 2015, FR Notice Requesting Emergency Clearance

July 7, 2015, FR Notice (SA 2015-03 Emg. Proc.).pdf

FRA Safety Advisory 2015-03, Operational and Signal Modifications for Compliance with Maximum Authorized Passenger Train Speeds and Other Speed Restrictions

July 7, 2015, FR Notice Requesting Emergency Clearance

OMB: 2130-0613

Document [pdf]
Download: pdf | pdf
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 129 / Tuesday, July 7, 2015 / Notices

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Airworthiness Division, Design
Certification Section (AIR–111), 950
L’Enfant Plaza SW., Washington, DC
20024. ATTN: Mr. Graham Long.
Telephone (202) 267–1624, fax 202–
267–1813, email to: graham.long@
faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to the Reauthorization Act of 1966 (110
Sat. 3213) SEC. 1205., Regulations
Affecting Intrastate Aviation in Alaska,
modifying regulations contained in Title
14 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
in a manner affecting intrastate aviation
in Alaska became law. The
Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration considered the extent to
which Alaska is not served by
transportation modes other than
aviation, established such regulatory
distinctions as deemed appropriate.
The Design, Manufacturing and
Airworthiness Division (AIR–100)
proposes Alaskan Fixed Wing External
Loads (FWEL) as a recognized special
purpose operation in the restricted
category, under Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
§ 21.25(b)(7). Alaskan FWEL is the
carriage of external loads temporarily
attached to small, fixed-wing aircraft
operating within the state of Alaska.
This approval is issued with the
following requirements:
1. Alaskan FWEL must be performed
in conjunction with the procedures
contained in FAA Notice N8900.272 (or
its successor policy).
2. An airplane eligible for the carriage
of external loads must:
a. Be a small propeller-driven airplane
type-certificated in accordance with 14
CFR part 23 (or its predecessor
regulations) in the normal, utility, or
acrobatic category, and have a valid
airworthiness certificate in that
category.
b. Have a maximum certificated
takeoff weight of 12,500 pounds or less.
3. The airworthiness limitations
issued with the airworthiness certificate
must include a requirement for training
in the carriage of FWEL. The pilot must
have sufficient knowledge of (1)
external load attaching methods; (2) the
airplane operating limitations issued for
the external load operation; and (3) how
the external load may affect the flight
characteristics of the airplane.
Note: Airplane Handling and Flight
Characteristics: When carrying external
loads, aerodynamic forces and the weight of
an external load change an airplane’s
handling and flight characteristics. These
forces can negatively affect airplane
performance (takeoff, climb, cruise, and
landing), airplane stability, flight control
effectiveness, vibration, fuel consumption,
and engine cooling, among other

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:31 Jul 06, 2015

Jkt 235001

38799

characteristics. The operator must take care
when selecting and mounting an external
load and also exercise prudence to avoid
operation outside the airplane’s approved
weight & balance envelope, and to avoid
aerodynamic effects that make operations
unsafe.

2014, replaces AC 20–159 and provides
guidance for applicants seeking
authorization to display an own-ship
symbol limited to the airport surface as
a Type B application for use on any
EFB.

4. The aircraft must be operated in
accordance with the gross weight and
flight envelope limitations when in the
restricted category.
5. No passengers are permitted on
board when in restricted category. All
persons onboard must be flight crew
members, flight crew member trainees,
persons who perform an essential
function in connection with the special
purpose operation, or persons necessary
to accomplish the work activity directly
associated with the special purpose
operation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 30,
2015.
Susan J.M. Cabler,
Acting Manager, Design, Manufacturing and
Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–16558 Filed 7–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Advisory Circular (AC) 20–159,
Obtaining Design and Production
Approval of Airport Moving Map
Display Applications Intended for
Electronic Flight Bag Systems
Federal Aviation
Administration (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of intent to cancel AC
20–159, Obtaining Design and
Production Approval of Airport Moving
Map Display Applications Intended for
Electronic Flight Bag Systems.
AGENCY:

This notice announces the
Federal Aviation Administration’s
(FAA) intent to cancel AC 20–159. This
cancellation will result in no new
approval of technical standard order
authorizations (TSOA) for an
‘‘incomplete system’’ issued for
Technical Standard Order (TSO) C–165,
Electronic Map Display Equipment for
Graphical Depiction of Aircraft Position.
Therefore, the guidance contained in AC
20–159 allowing applicants to obtain a
design and production approval using
the software and database for an airport
moving map display (AMMD) intended
for use on a Class 2 electronic flight bag
(EFB) for ground operations, will no
longer be available. FAA AC 120–76C,
Guidelines for the Certification,
Airworthiness, and Operational Use of
Electronic Flight Bags, dated May 9,

SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00139

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

To
obtain additional details, please contact:
Mr. Brad Miller, AIR–130, Federal
Aviation Administration, Aircraft
Certification Service, Systems and
Equipment Standards Branch, 470
L’Enfant Plaza Suite 4102, Washington,
DC 20024, Telephone (202) 267–8533,
FAX: (202) 267–267–8589, Email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In mid-March 2007, the FAA
Administrator directed FAA to publish
guidance by the end of April 2007 to
facilitate the use of an AMMD
application on EFBs and to streamline
the certification means to deploy this
safety enhancement to address airport
runway incursions. AC 20–159 provided
EFB AMMD applicant guidance to
obtain TSO–C165 software-only TSO
authorization requiring the need to
obtain a design or production approval.
However, AC 120–76C later introduced
guidance to necessitate only an
operator-based evaluation submitted to
an FAA inspector for EFB hardware and
software application authorization. The
FAA envisions all new authorizations
for use of AMMD functionality on EFBs
be obtained under AC 120–76C as a
Type B application.
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 30,
2015.
Susan J.M. Cabler,
Acting Manager, Design, Manufacturing, &
Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–16556 Filed 7–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
[Docket No. FRA–2015–0007–N–18]

Agency Request for Emergency
Processing of Collection of
Information by the Office of
Management and Budget
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), United States
Department of Transportation (USDOT).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

FRA hereby gives notice that
it is submitting the following
Information Collection request (ICR) to

SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM

07JYN1

38800

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 129 / Tuesday, July 7, 2015 / Notices

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for emergency processing under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
FRA requests that OMB authorize the
collection of information identified
below seven days after publication of
this Notice for a period of 180 days.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A
copy of this individual ICR, with
applicable supporting documentation,
may be obtained by telephoning FRA’s
Office of Safety Clearance Officer:
Robert Brogan (tel. (202) 493–6292) or
FRA’s Office of Administration
Clearance Officer: Kimberly Toone (tel.
(202) 493–6132); these numbers are not
toll-free; or by contacting Mr. Brogan via
facsimile at (202) 493–6216 or Ms.
Toone via facsimile at (202) 493–6497,
or via email by contacting Mr. Brogan at
[email protected]; or by contacting
Ms. Toone at [email protected].
Comments and questions about the ICR
identified below should be directed to
OMB’s Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Attn: FRA OMB
Desk Officer.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
Tuesday, May 12, 2015, Amtrak
passenger train 188 (Train 188) was
traveling timetable east (northbound)
from Washington, DC, to New York City.
Aboard the train were five Amtrak crew
members, three Amtrak employees, and
250 passengers. Train 188 consisted of
a locomotive in the lead and seven
passenger cars trailing. Shortly after
9:20 p.m., the train derailed while
traveling through a curve at Frankford
Junction in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
As a result of the accident, eight persons
were killed, and a significant number of
persons were seriously injured.
The National Transportation Safety
Board (NTSB) has taken the lead role

conducting the investigation of this
accident under its legal authority. 49
U.S.C. 1101 et seq.; 49 CFR 831.2(b). As
is customary, FRA is participating in the
NTSB’s investigation and also
investigating the accident under its own
authority. While NTSB has not yet
issued any formal findings, the
information released to date indicates
that train speed was a factor in the
derailment. As Train 188 approached
the curve from the west, it traveled over
a straightaway with a maximum
authorized passenger train speed of 80
mph. The maximum authorized
passenger train speed for the curve was
50 mph. NTSB determined that the train
was traveling approximately 106 mph
within the curve’s 50-mph speed
restriction, exceeding the maximum
authorized speed on the straightaway by
26 mph, and 56 mph over railroad’s
maximum authorized speed for the
curve. FRA issued Emergency Order No.
31 (EO 31; 80 FR 30534, May 28, 2015)
in response to this derailment. EO 31
requires Amtrak to take prescribed
actions to ensure the safe operation of
passenger trains on the Northeast
Corridor.
In addition to the recent Amtrak
passenger train derailment discussed
above, in December 2013, a New York
State Metropolitan Transportation
Authority Metro-North Commuter
Railroad Company (Metro-North) train
derailed as it approached the Spuyten
Duyvil Station in Bronx, New York. The
train traveled over a straightaway with
a maximum authorized passenger train
speed of 70 mph before reaching a sharp
curve in the track with a maximum
authorized speed of 30 mph. NTSB’s
investigation of the Metro-North
accident determined the train was

traveling approximately 82 mph as it
entered the curve’s 30-mph speed
restriction before derailing. That
derailment resulted in four fatalities and
at least 61 persons being injured. The
Metro-North accident is similar to the
recent Amtrak accident in that it
involved a serious overspeed event in a
sharp curve in the track. As a result of
the derailment, FRA issued Emergency
Order No. 29 (78 FR 75442, Dec. 11,
2013) requiring Metro-North to take
certain actions to control passenger train
speeds and also issued Safety Advisory
2013–08 to further enhance safety.
FRA issued Safety Advisory 2015–03
on June 12, 2015 (see 80 FR 33585) to
stress to passenger railroads and
railroads that host passenger service and
their employees the importance of
compliance with Federal regulations
and applicable railroad rules governing
applicable passenger train speed limits.
This safety advisory makes
recommendations to these railroads to
ensure that compliance with applicable
passenger train speed limits is
addressed by appropriate railroad
operating policies and procedures and
signal systems.
FRA is requesting Emergency
processing approval seven days after
publication of this Federal Register
Notice because FRA cannot reasonably
comply with normal clearance
procedures on account of use of normal
clearance procedures is reasonably
likely to disrupt the collection of
information. The associated collection
of information is summarized below.
Title: Operational and Signal
Modification for Compliance with
Maximum Authorized Passenger Train
Speeds and Other Speed Restrictions.
Reporting Burden:

Safety advisory 2015–03

Respondent
universe

Total
annual
responses

Average
time per
response

(1) RR Review of Circumstances of the Fatal May 12, 2015, Philadelphia Derailment with their Operating Employees.
(2) RR Survey of their Entire Systems or the Portions on Which
Passenger Service is Operated and Identification of Main Track
Locations where there is a Reduction of More than 20 mph from
the Approach Speed to a Curve or Bridge and the Maximum Authorized Operating Speed for Passenger Trains at the Identified
Location.
(3) Communications between Locomotive Engineer and a Second
Qualified Crew Member in the Body of the Train at Identified Locations.
(4) RR Installation of Additional Wayside Signs throughout Its System or Portions on Which Passenger Service is Operated, with
Special Emphasis at Identified Locations.

28 Railroads ......

28 RR Bulletins ...

8 hours ..............

224

28 Railroads ......

28 Surveys/Lists ..

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

1,120

28 Railroads ......

2,800 Messages/
Communications.
3,024 Wayside
Signs.

2 minutes ...........

93

15.4839 minutes

780

Form Number(s): N/A.
Respondent Universe: 28 Railroads.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:31 Jul 06, 2015

Jkt 235001

28 Railroads ......

Frequency of Submission: One-time;
on occasion.

PO 00000

Frm 00140

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Total
annual
burden hours

Total Estimated Responses: 5,880.

E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM

07JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 129 / Tuesday, July 7, 2015 / Notices
Total Estimated Annual Burden:
2,217 hours.
Status: Emergency Review.
Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5
CFR 320.5(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.
Rebecca Pennington,
Chief Financial Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015–16607 Filed 7–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Transit Administration
Pilot Program for Expedited Project
Delivery
AGENCY:

Federal Transit Administration,

DOT.
Request for Expressions of
Interest to Participate.

ACTION:

The Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) announces
establishment of the Pilot Program for
Expedited Project Delivery (Pilot
Program) authorized by Section 20008
of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the
21st Century Act (MAP–21), Public Law
112–141, July 6, 2012, and solicits
expressions of interest to participate.
The Pilot Program is aimed at increasing
innovation, improving efficiency and
timeliness of project implementation,
and encouraging new revenue streams
for new fixed guideway projects and
core capacity improvement projects.
FTA plans to use the lessons learned
from the Pilot Program to assist other
project sponsors to develop more
effective approaches to project planning,
project development, finance, design,
and construction. Additionally, FTA
anticipates that the Pilot Program will
help to identify impediments in current
laws, regulations, and practices to the
greater use of innovative project
development and delivery methods or
innovative financing arrangements.
Participants selected for the Pilot
Program may receive enhanced
technical assistance and expedited FTA
reviews to speed up planning,
development, and delivery of eligible
Capital Investment Grant (CIG) program
projects and ultimately receive Full
Funding Grant Agreements under that
program. Should legislation be enacted
for the Pilot Program that would allow
projects to proceed outside of the
normal CIG program processes and

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:31 Jul 06, 2015

Jkt 235001

criteria, participants also may be able to
receive a Full Funding Grant Agreement
under the terms of that legislation.
Lastly, participants selected for the Pilot
Program also may benefit from technical
assistance provided by the Department
of Transportation’s Build America
Transportation Investment Center
(BATIC). This announcement is
available on the FTA’s Web site at:
www.fta.dot.gov.
DATES: Expressions of interest to become
one of the three selected participants in
the Pilot Program for Expedited Project
Delivery must be submitted to FTA by
mail, email or facsimile by August 1,
2015. Mail submission must be
addressed to the Office of Planning and
Environment, Federal Transit
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Room E45–119,
Washington, DC 20590 and postmarked
no later than August 1, 2015. Email
submissions must be sent to
[email protected] by
11:59 p.m. EDT on August 1, 2015.
Facsimile submissions must be
submitted to the attention of Expedited
Project Delivery Pilot Program at 202–
493–2478 by 11:59 p.m. EDT on August
1, 2015. If there are insufficient
candidate projects that are able to meet
the requirements of the Pilot Program,
FTA may conduct additional
application rounds in the future.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Jackson, FTA Office of Planning
and Environment, telephone (202) 366–
8520 or email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Background
Each year FTA, together with its
transit industry partners, invests
billions of dollars in capital projects
designed to improve public
transportation by reinvesting in existing
assets to expand capacity or by
increasing the extent and quality of
public transportation service by making
new investments. These projects take
considerable time to plan, develop,
design, approve and deploy. While it is
important for FTA to ensure that it
selects only well-conceived projects for
funding and that they are implemented
in the most efficient and effective
manner, too long a process delays the
delivery of the intended benefits to the
riding public.
2. Pilot Program
Section 20008(b) of MAP–21
establishes a Pilot Program for new
fixed guideway or core capacity projects
as defined under the Section 5309
Capital Investment Grant (CIG) program
that demonstrate innovative project

PO 00000

Frm 00141

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

38801

development and delivery methods or
innovative financing arrangements.
Section 20008(b) specifies that FTA
must select three eligible projects for the
Pilot Program: (1) at least one project
must request greater than $100 million
in Section 5309 CIG funds; (2) at least
one project must request less than $100
million in CIG funds; and (3) a project
that requests any amount of CIG funds.
Section 20008(b) requires that the CIG
share of the total cost of selected
projects must not exceed 50 percent. It
also specifies that projects already in
receipt of an FFGA are not eligible.
Section 20008(b) requires that project
sponsors applying to participate must
submit: (1) information identifying the
proposed eligible project; (2) a schedule
and finance plan for the construction
and operation of the project; (3) an
analysis of the efficiencies of the
proposed project development and
delivery methods or innovative
financing arrangements for the project;
and (4) a certification that the project
sponsor’s existing public transportation
system is in a state of good repair. FTA
may not award a full funding grant
agreement until after the project sponsor
has completed necessary planning
activities and the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
process, and the recipient has
demonstrated the necessary legal,
technical, and financial capacity to
successfully complete the project.
The law requires participants in the
program to develop a Before and After
Study Report that describes and
analyzes the impacts of the project on
public transportation services and
ridership, describes and analyzes the
consistency of predicted and actual
benefits and costs of the innovative
project development and delivery or
innovative financing, and identifies
reasons for any differences between the
predicted and actual outcomes. The law
requires the project sponsor submit the
Before and After Study Report to FTA
not later than nine months after the
initiation of revenue service of the
project.
FTA recently issued Proposed CIG
Interim Policy Guidance to fully
implement the changes made by MAP–
21 to the program, and expects to
finalize this guidance shortly, thereby
facilitating the implementation of this
Pilot Program. At present, there is no
separate funding for the Pilot Program.
Instead, the projects in the Pilot
Program must compete for CIG funding.
In addition, the provisions of Section
20008(b) also do not provide for any
exemption from the requirements of the
CIG program, including the rating and
evaluation of projects under the project

E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM

07JYN1


File Typeapplication/pdf
File Modified2015-07-07
File Created2015-07-07

© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy