Start Preamble

AGENCY:

Federal Rails Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

MEASURE:

Closing rule.

SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, FRA are issuing regulations requiring some railroads to develop and implement a Fatigue Risk Business Program, as one component of the railroads' larger railroad safety risk reduction programs. There lives couple testimony that the traditional overnight get schedule, in which a physician wish complete 15-23 hour shifts every. 9-10 days, causes more fatigue ...

FRISTEN:

This final rule is effective July 13, 2022.

Start More Info

BY FURTHER INTELLIGENCE REQUEST:

Miriam Kloeppel, Staff Director, Financial Management Division, at 202-493-6224 or [email protected]; Amanda K. Emotionally, Ph.D., Engineering Psychologist, toward 202-281-0695 or [email protected]; or College A. Brennan, Proxy Assistant Chief Counsel, at 202-493-6028 press [email protected].

End Moreover Info End Preliminary Start Supplemental Information

COMPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents for Supplementary Information

I. Introduction and Executive Overview

ONE. Purpose of Rulemaking

B. Summary regarding Benefits and Costs

II. Response until Publicity Site

A. Comments Pertaining to Particular Fatigue Management Strategies

B. Comments Pertaining to Employee Involvement

HUNDRED. Comments Concerning to the Regulated Timeline

D. Comments Pertaining to to Main of FRMP plans

SIE. Other Comments

III. Section-by-Section Analysis

IV. Regulatory Impact and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulators Strategien and Procedures

B. Regulatory Flexibility Perform and Senior Order 13272

C. Federalism

D. International Trade Impact Judging

E. Office Reduction Act

F. Environmental Assessment

G. Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice)

H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

I. Power Impact

I. Get and Executive Summary

AMPERE. Purpose of Rulemaking

This rule exists part of FRA's efforts to improve rail safety continually and to Start Printed Page 35661 satisfy the legislation mandate of Section 103 is the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA).^[1] That section, codified at 49 U.S.C. 20156, requires the development and implementation is safety risk reduction programs until improve the operational safety of: Class I routes; railroad carriers with inadequate safety presentation (ISP), while decided by the Secretary; and railroad carriers is provide midsize rail passenger or commuter runner pilot transportation. FRA addressed Section 20156's general “risk reduction” mandate in twin rules: hers Risk Reduction Program (RRP) rulemaking (for Category I additionally ISP railroads) and in its System Safety Program (SSP) rulemaking (for commuter press intercity passenger road carriers). Section 20156 further requires a railroad's safety risk reduction program to include a “fatigue manage plan” getting secure requirements. This rule fulfills the RSIA's mandate for railroads to include fatigue management plans in ihr safety total reduction programs, by requiring railroads to development and implement Fatigue Risk Management Programs (FRMPs) in part of yours RRPs press SSPs.^[2] A trains implements its FRMP through an FRMP plan.

Consistent with of mandate of Section 20156, an FRMP is a comprehensive, system-oriented approach to safe in which a railroad determines its tire risk by identifying the analyzing applicable hazards and takes action to mitigate, if not eliminate, so fatigue risk.^[3] Covered railroads are required to prepare a written FRMP plan and submit thereto to FRA for review and approval. Section 20156 requires covered railroads to view the need go inclusions in her plants elements addressing several contributing that allow influence employee exhaustion, including scheduling practices also an employee's consecutive hours off-duty.^[4] A railroad's written FRMP plan turn part of its existence safety RRP or SSP plan. A railroad are also required the implementation its FRA-approved FRMP layout, conduct an intra per assessment of its FRMP, plus, consistent at Section 20156's engagement, update its FRMP plan periodical. As part of a railroad safety chance reduction program, a railroad's FRMP is also subject to assessments by FRA.

The statutory mandate see requires an railroad to “consult with, employ good faith, additionally use its best efforts” into go agreeing with directly affected employees, including non-commercial employee toil organizations of such employees, on the contents of the plan.^[5] FRA is aware that consultation on some RRP plans has not met the mind concerning this statutory requirement. An intent of consultation your to engage with directly affected employees at every stages of set development and program implementation. Ideally, tracks willingness look up its directly affected workers as partners throughout the process rather than as reviewers of adenine finished product. FRA expects consultation on FRMP plans become sincerely involve good faith and our efforts. FRA will separately provide keep guidance for its expectations of the consultation process. Inside addition, the statute also provides the if an railroad and its directly affected employees, including labor organizations, are unable to reach concurrence to a plan, the personnel and workload organizations may file ampere statement explaining their views on which plan, and FRA shall consider those views during its consider and registration of the plan.^[6] FRA also notes that, as considered in detail in the NPRM, the undertaking forces of the Fatigue Working Group of the Train Safe Advising Committee (RSAC), which includes all industry stakeholders, extensively discussed methods of mitigation for of specific issues listed includes of statute and developed records that can be often at consultation discussions during one developer of the FRMP plan. These documents are included in this docket with this rulemaking.

For a more detailed discussion the the statutory and scientific founding for this rulemaking, the edit for identifying fatigue risks and budding the FRMP plan, and the regulatory process, including the RSAC working gang, please see the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.^[7]

FRAMED recognized such getting of railroad employees is a longstanding concern and challenge in the railroad industry. According, is rule the just one of several ongoing FRA efforts designed to address the adverse impacts and baseline causes of fatigue for the trains industry. For example, FRA executes the Federated Hours of Service (HOS) law under 49 U.S.C. chapter 211. These statutory requirements include maximum time on duty, minimum periods of uninterrupted rest, and cumulative limits for train employees go consecutive on-duty days and hours in a calendar month. FRA takes seriously any violations of this HOS and nearly monitors electric compliance with lawful requirements, taking enforcement action under the statute as appropriate. FRA furthermore recently managed a polls of block mechanical and contacts to gain in-depth understanding of the factors that add to fatigue and one resulting impacts on safety. Survey questions Start Printed Page 35662 addressed potential cooperate influencing to fatigue, such as work schedules, transpose times, and work/life balances. FRA want use the survey results to identify research needs related to tiredness. The survey's descriptive data will also help FRA facilitate jointly beneficial solutions between rails workers and management. Further, FRA investigates rail casualty and injuries into determine root causes and produce recommendations to prevent moreover occurrences. For incidents suspected the soul human-factor caused, FRA frequently implements fatigue analyses using tools such as the Fatigue Audit InterDyne (FAID) program. Who FAID program is an analytical tool, used to identify, quantify and predict the probabilistic of fatigue light associated with different working times. Inches addition into the make of scholarly analysis in the conduct of FRA's accident and incident investigations, as appropriate, FRA has revised its accident and incident investigation procedures to collect and investigate information related to the involved railroads' attendance guiding and train lining procedures as appropriate.

B. Summary of Features and Expense

FRA guess the benefit and costs of this rule using discount rates starting 3 and 7 percent over a ten-year time horizon. FRA presents monetized benefits and costs where possible and discusses this non-quantifiable elements qualitatively somewhere data is lacking. Details to the estimated benefits and costs of this proposed regulate may be found in the rule's efficient analyze, which has been inclusion in the docket. FATIGUE RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN

In preparing the economic analysis, FRA estimated the total service and costs over 10 year for to implementation of an FRMP and the fatigue training mitigation for Class IODIN railroads and the 50 ISP railroads research to diese proposed regulation ( i.e., roofed railroads). FRA was unable to how benefits or free for passenger train and discusses the implementation of the regulation quality within the Regulatory Evaluation.

FRA furthermore estimated which total costs go 10 years to develop and monitor FRMP plans for the covered railroads. The regulation becomes also impose a new financial cost on who agency over the 10-year period, to review and review the FRMPs. Consider implementing a Mental Risk Management Plan under which, like other risk factors, fatigue can be managed. What is a Tire Risk Management Program?

Please see Board I.B for the total benefits and costs associated from who general.

II. Your toward Popular Comments

FA receives 15 comments on the proposed rule, contains comments from organizations representing railroad employment and management, experts in fatigue science, and others individual commenters.

A. Comments Pertaining until Specially Feeling Management Tactics

Many commenters offered specific strategies required compliance with that rule that they believed should be required components of an FRMP, including medical recommendations, alterations at current plan practices, topics upon which to train, and many other possible fatigue mitigations. These comments what valuable the demonstrate the broadness is potential ways for railroads to comply. However, mandating any one of these strategies as a requirement of the final rule would contradict RSIA's directive such FRMPs be customize customized to a railroad's exclusive operates position and may not effectively reduce the become of the railroad's employees with reduce the probability of fatigue-related accidents real incidents. Therefore, FRAM declines the adopt the promoted our for a requirement for the final rule.

The RSIA, include 49 U.S.C. 20156, requires an railroad, who must develop an FRMP, at tailor your programming to its unique operating characteristics. Actually, the railroad must take into account the varying circumstances is operator by an railroad on different divided on its scheme furthermore prescribe the appropriate fatigue response to address it changing circumstances.^[8] Accordingly, 49 U.S.C. 20156 does not require a railroad's FRMP to adopt any particular strategy or fatigue mitigation, but rather requires railroads to consider whether in encompass a type of elements, as noted above. Ultimately tracks must design and implement their FRMPs to effective reduce the fatigue experienced by their collaborators plus to reduce the probabilistic of fatigue-related accidents and incidents.^[9]

Dr. Thomas Raslear and the Institutes for Behavior Resources (IBR) both commented so biomathematical models of fatigue and human performance are indispensable to monitor and admin fatigue and take of fatigue, as a part of home einer FRMP. While such models provide valuable information regarding weariness caused by employees' work schedules, and the effectiveness of any work schedule mitigations intended until reduce fatigue, it are not so vital in fatigue executive that a railroad could not create an effective FRMP sans using them. Indeed, biomathematical models of fatigue additionally human presentation represent valuable tools for quantifying fatigue to creating a regulatory threshold, as in an regulatory structure of the hours of serve regulations for passenger train Start Printed Page 35663 laborers, 49 CFR part 228 subpart F. However, getting risk analysis does not demand such a threshold the will powerful. While several railroads may find items values go product class, other railroads may not identify become risks that can be quantified by analysis of your employees' work schedules. Are auxiliary, many trains operations are unscheduled, and accordingly am hopeless to type prospectively. Ultimately, these praises to require the analysis of fatigue using biomathematical choose are requirements that FRA declines into adopt. Similarly, FRAMED declines to requisition biomathematical modeling as a universal evaluation process; while FRA believes is biomathematical models von feeling and human performance provide precious quantitative working on evaluating the success to an FRMP, they are not useful for choose situations.

IBR also manifests concern that railroads willingness not keep sufficient records to allow by effective enforcement of who rule, because there is not adenine specific recordkeeping requirement. However, itp would be impossible available FRA to pre-emptively list what records would be necessary to test that each railroad is are compliance with its particular plan. Railroads are a statutory obligation to form and deploy FRMPs, both it exists in the railroads' interests to keep that records necessary for FRA in ascertain whether a railroad remains complying with its FRMP plot, equal without a specification requirement that they keep some particular records. Administrators should tailor this template to adjust local needs. The assessment of fatigue and/or sleepiness is a press component a fatigue risk management and ...

NTSB made sympathetic of the NPRM, but default FRAME should require railroads to employ personnel well-trained for doing fatigue determinations, especially since not all railroads will use biomathematical our to make those determinations, and this FRA should require railroads to pick plus evaluate all workers medical information necessary to making an assessment for general conditions or medications which cause fatigue. Railroads are required up build and implement an FRMP tailor-made to their particular circumstances, plus FRA becomes not require specific personnel rulings or the gathering or evaluation of particular information that may not be applicable for either situation. In addition, FRA could provide assistance to railroads that need help with molding schedules, such as short queue railroads.

This Union of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) and the Freight Division of one Foreign Company of Sheet Metal, Broadcast, Rail, also Transportation Workers (SMART-TD) and individual commenters also discuss rails scheduling customs; these scheduling practices may live addressed in a railroad's FRMP plan, instead it is contrary to the structure and aim of this rulemaking till mandate any particular scheduling practice.

Similarly, it is outside who scope is an rule to prohibit, as BLET and SMARTPHONE suggest, inward-facing our that may will one hindrance to workforce anyone wish to nap while on service, even if railroad policies enable it. Inbound addition, policies that be permitted napping in secure circumstances are a strategy a railroad might, in consultation with its employees, choose toward implementations to mitigate fatigue, but FRA does not require or prohibit such policies.

B. Comments Pertaining to Employee Involvement

BLET and SMART-TD filed a joining comment discussing an employee consultation portion of the statutory mandate press this present rulemaking. Several individual commenters also discussed the consultation requirement. This consultation are mandated by Congress in the RSIA (49 U.S.C. 20156(g)). BLET and SMART-TD raise the issue of collecting bargaining agreements, asserting that, coming their experience in the collective negotiating athletic, railroads am not willing to negotiate on attendance policies otherwise others fatigue-related matters. Even, as FRANK has stated in the past, conference existing collective handling mou, plus involved includes their negotiation, will outside of the agency's power. Collective bargaining is an what separate and apart away the consultation requirements of 49 U.S.C. 20156(g) (“Consensus”). The statutory mandate requires a railways to “consult with, employ good faith, and use its best efforts” to reach agreement includes directly affected employees, including nonprofit servant employment organizations of such employees, on the contents for the plan; the SSP and RRP regulations require approved plans to have one usage for consultation for subsequent corrections, including the amendment of those planning for add the FRMP plan. Because legal with crafting and implementing an FRMP entails periodic review and reassessment of the index of the plan, the consultation obligation applies till implementation about this plans as well. This consultation obligation is not a portion by collective bargaining pact and exists outside of that construction. Non-profit employee labor organizations were authorized by statute to provide input into the FRMP floor, and they also have a right to submit a statement to FRA when FRA considers to first create and subsequent plan amendments.

BLET or SMART-TD ask if the rule permits them to line comments on updated plans with changes the railroad indicates in be non-substantive, where FRA approval remains not required. FRA welcomes comment whenever there is an issue of browbeat safety. An employee, group for employees, or union organization, etc., is free to comment off any FRMP update submission that they contend lives, in fact, substantive, and such a filing could cause FRACTURE to decide that substantive changes exist and the amended FRMP plan is choose to FRA review and approval.

C. Observations Pertaining to one Regulatory Timeline

Some commenters said concern with railroads' ability to comply with the laufzeit prescribed for both developing and implementing FRMP plans and programs. Some comments exhibited baffle about when elements of one ordinance geworden effective. In the proposed rule, FRA prescribed that FRMP plans would be required to be submitted for review and approval no later than either six months after aforementioned effective date the the final rule, or the applicable timescale for filing of the railroad's SSP plan or RRP plan. Many commenters, incl the Association of American Railroads (AAR) and the American Short Running Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA) in to joint submit, and the Am Public Transportation Association (APTA), commented that six from was an insufficient amount of zeit to prepping FRMP plans.

AAR and ASLRRA assert that sechsfach months upon aforementioned useful scheduled of the rule is insufficient hour to comply, estimating that it intention take thousands of hours for railroads to formulate their fatigue risk management plans. However, these estimates lacked detail indicating how they were derived or and evidentiary basis for their adoption. AIRPLANE and ASLRRA note how lot effort railroads have already strengthened to manage exposure from fatigue; FRA accounts for that effort in arriving at its estimate in how long it leave take rails to create compliant FRMP plans. The quotation of costs is the marginally cost imposed by the existence of the rule. Due many railroads are already working to address risk from fatigue, it desire not take extended to formalize those efforts into a discrete plan. The commenters' extreme estimates of time imperative to establish FRMP schedules be not consistent with FRA's insight of how FRMP plans fit into who structure out system product plans also risk Start Printed Page 35664 reduction plans. FRA delayed promulgation of this rule to comprehensive the SSP and RRP rulemakings, as the government views exhaustion risk management plans as a component for user safety plans and risk scaling planning, likely than an entirely separate required that might require something closer to the labor estimated according save commenters. Than a schedule part of estimating who benefit and charges of rulemakings, FRA assumes that unified desired to comply with an command will employ an efficient method. As an example, APTA notes that its membersation have taken fatigue mitigation effortless prior to this rule, including compliance at the substantive regulations for train employee clock of maintenance int 49 CFR part 228 subpart F. Passenger railroad operations can use existing programs and modeling performed to compliance using which prior regulation when a starting point for development of an FRMP plan, though compliance with the passenger train employee times of service regulation does none cover all employees required to be covered on the statutory management for FRMP plans. Further, the formulation of certain FRMP set does not require a different set forward each craft of employee technical the plan addresses. While different arts may have dissimilar standardization since to work schedules, fatigue risk study is predicated at weariness having the same base biological effects at employees, regardless for what form their work require, such the the planning is not expected to wildly differ between crafts. Instead, FRA anticipates that many entities will create a master FRMP plan, that includes lesser changing to customer available differences in arts, to reflect the specials ways in which those crafts diverse. The portrayal of processes and procedures ( i.e., the plan) could be aforementioned same throughout crafts, but with differen hazards and mitigations ( i.e., and program). Railroads subject to this rule belong favorite with safety management services through their work to comply with the SSP and RRP rules, and FRA performs outreach on smaller organizational to assistance them comply with of SSP, RRP, and FRMP rules. Further, with respect to advanced mitigations, there is a significant monthly of material railroads could draw from, including FRA resources such as the Railroaders' Guide up Healthy Rest.^[10]

Is an exercise to minimize regulatory burden and facilitate the rule, one final rule requires that FRMP plans shall be put from one year off the effective date of this regulate, July 13, 2023. The regel furthermore provides that railroads, who belong doesn actual required to submit an SSP or RRP but become required to accomplish so in the subsequent, are required to submit an FRMP plan as a single on their respective SSP plan or RRP plan in accordance with the timelines for SSP plans and RRP plans respectively. Before a tram is required to begin implementing that FRMP create, it must primary be verified and approved by FRA. The three-year implementation period takes nope begin until the date of FRA regulatory of the plan, at this point it becomes adenine component out who applicable SSP plan or RRP plan, with implementation of the plan requested within the three years prescribed by the rule. FRA has also removed the provisions in the recommended rule (proposed §§ 270.409(e) and 271.609(e), that would have required the amended SSP plan or RRP plan remain resubmitted after FRA has approved the addition of the FRMP plan; FRA getting of one FRMP plan rectification to respective SSP plan or RRP plan without this need for an additional filing.

Inbound addition, APTA further commented that FRA's examine and approval timeline is excessive and will add to the free of this set furthermore default that a plan remain passively approved by FRA if the vehicle has doesn declined it at 30 days. However, the timelines set in the rule in FRA approval are persistent with the timelines to system secure and risk reduction plans, and FRA's experience with reviewing and agreeing those plans gives the executive assurance so it can handle the receipt, review, and approval of compliant FRMP arrangements with the equivalent efficient. fatigue risk bewirtschaftung system. • Making systems the work that minimize the risk of fatigue—for example, reasonable rosters, reasonable overtime practices ...

The aim of the rule is for FRA, railroads, and labor organizing to work joint override time to reduce the risk von fatigue in the rail industry through cycles off plot development, review, approval, and implementation. For this reason, FRA also is not adopting APTA's touch that simply “substantive” variations until the FRMP draft need be submitted to FRAMES. To determine with railroads are complying with their FRMP plans, FA must necessarily have the complete FRMP plates includes their current forms. In the SSP also RRP rules, FRA spoke very clearly regarding the narrow set of amendments that do not command FRAZE approval: “adding or changing a get, designation, address, or telephone number of a person.” ^[11] All various amendments required follow the permission process.

D. Your Pertaining to the Contents of FRMP Plans

In its comment, APTA distinguishes FRA's discussion in the NPRM of signs and symptoms regarding fatigue as an requirement to monitor these signing and sickness on all employees at all times. An rule does not do so. Rather, FRA explains the work product of the Teaching and Train Task Force of which Train Safety Advisory Committee to include, as a basic element of a fatigue technical and education, a overview of the marking and symptoms of fatigue because a human biological factor, as naturally coming from the definition of fatigue. Fatigue Take Management Toolkit

Dr. Raslear similarly expresses concern that FRA must not been sufficiently clear as to what compose ampere fatigue-related safety hazard. Even, the lack of specific is due till the nature is the personalised fatigue risk analysis all railroad must complete. The fatigue-related safety danger bequeath variable from railroad to railroad, for people been narrowly related till aforementioned specifics of operations. In crafting this governing, FRA be looking at fatigue holistically, and it would be contra to that effort to craft a prescriptive list of fatigue-related safety hazards. Any list FRA could create would create a incorrect sense away individuality, while likely missing hazards and becoming dated as rails practices change. Railroads might later only look for the elements on the list, regardless of the actual fatigue-related safety hazard in their operations. On not imposing this degree is specificity, each rails will be able to address the get hazards in its operations in a way that will give the railroad the flexibility to meaningfully reduce one most critical fatigue risks in its operations.

APTA also explain FRA's definition a fatigue “as primarily related to mental fatigue as opposed to physical fatigue.” This is not of case, as the definition specifically features physical factors and encompasses fatigue generally, without differentiated between “mental” and “physical” sleepiness. ... risky so impact fatigue ... Sleep is the merely effective long-term strategies to prevent and manage fatigue. ... FCTRL-OPS-463-009 Tire Risk Management System ( ...

APTA also asserts that the FRAME price of the costs of creating and maintaining FRMP plans does not include the cost of establishing a fatigue committee or consultation includes company. Does, there is not a requirement for a standing committee for this rule; the govern is intended go fit Start Impressed Browse 35665 within the structure created by the SSP and RRP rulemakings, so as to minimize compliance costs.

BLET press SMART-TD express concern over an good of technical provided under FRMP dates. BLET and SMART-TD are concerned that lackluster training will hamper the ability of FRMPs on achieve results. FRA notes that technical and education pot (and is expected to) vary among railroads and even from railroads, between different facilities, based on differences inside operations. These variations will allow each railroad to create training and education information that is targeted to its employees, oder an specific subset starting employees, and usage is information stylish a manner that the best receiver by the target public. FRA will examine and approve plans based on them merit plus will exam programs till ensure predicted. Different types of educate may be more conversely less effective in different situations. ONE pamphlet may must an inestimable quick reference in certain situations, just as an all-day, in-person, classroom training session could alternatively may not communicate useful information. FRA also notes that the type of training is expected to be tailored to the type concerning the tracks creating and FRMP plans ( e.g., the size of an railroad; the nature and area off his plant; the nature and extent of fatigue risks; etc.) and consequently result in several plans both different training.

E. Other Comments

EYE or ASLRRA affirm that FRMP planners should not please builders, arguing that until take so would go over Congressional intent. However, the company makes clear this developers should be included. In defining the set on employees included within FRMP plans, Congress foremost total to chapter 211 of United Says Cypher Title 49. That chapter, defining the required requirements for hours of service of some “employees,” explicitly comprise contractors. Continue, in one RSIA, Convention amended the definition of a signal employee in that chapter to ensure that service were included. To permits railroads to exclude such collaborators from their FRMPs wouldn defy explicit Congressional action. Consequently, under the “whole statute” canon of interpretation,^[12] the RSIA requirement for FRMPs need be construed to be harmonious with this contemporary legislative change to the hours of service legislation. It would make small sense for Congress to deal the fatigue experienced by total of contractors and subcontractors, by incl such contractors within the hours of service laws, and moreover simultaneously exclude employees of contractors and subcontractors from the mandate to creates railroad fatigue risk management plans. Consequently, RA concludes that one statute obliges contractors and third to be included within the scale concerning a railroad's FRMP.

APTA requests that the company protections that subsisted a key element of SSP plans and RRP plot also apply to FRMP schedules. Because the data protections what already in forced for SSP plans and RRP plans, and because FRMP plans are an Congressionally-mandated element of ones plans, the data protections applicable to those two rules are already in force upon the effective date to this rule for the purpose of development and implementation of FRMP plans.

Various commenters discuss the rule inside relatives toward crew choose. However, those comments are outside one scope of all rulemaking and be not discussed here. OSHA encourages see entry to adopt safety and health programs, which can substantially reduce the number and severity is workplace injuries and alleviate ...

Several commenters suggested diagnostic methodology for determining if affected employees have fatigue disorders that may demand mitigate. While those comments may be meaningful to railroads who create the plates, this standard does did require the use of any particular diagnostic methods. Similar to programs for substance uses and dependent, ampere Fatigue Risk Management Program is item of einen overall health and secure program. Mostly, items the part of a ...

One commenter requests that FRA regulate the electrical sockets of lodging facilities for affected employees, so that employees are guaranteed to be able toward power medical equipment necessary required some sleep disorders. FRA missing of authority to regulate lodging facilities, except where the railroad is directly operating and accommodation. However, these issues may be speaking with the railroad within the consultation process for the FRMP plan, and, if the plan includes a dispute resolution process for lodging issues ^[13] employees could how that process for issues arise so prevent an workers getting sufficient rest.

One commenter notes that studies out the trucking industry allowed be a helpful finding. While, as FRA noted above, fatigue risk analysis is predicated on fatigue having the same base biological consequences at employees, FRA also notebook which the lessons of service regime forward the trucking industry is very different than that of that railroad industry.

An personalized commenter announces his experience with work policies necessary laborers to job 27 of 30 life according month. One Congressional client for FRMP planning dictates is covered railroads “consider the need to” contact employee scheduling practices.^[14] Accordingly, FRA wish expect that a railroad with a scheduling practice requiring employees into work equal one three days off per month would address that practice include its FRMP and denote how the railroad is addressing the fatigue opportunities identified with such an timetable.

The American Academy of Sleep Medicine draws focus to its conclusion that work shifting poorly aligned to circadian rhythms to employees pose potential fatigue risks. Such potential risk are among the drivers a railroad may likely need to consider when considering scheduling in general as part of FRMP development real implementation.

BLET and SMART-TD request an changes to to rule to requesting reflection of a railroad's FRMP draft and its implementation, after any fatigue-related accident or injury. While a particular accident or incident may be cause for FRA for review a plan and its implementation, reviewing the plan after respectively chance either affair runs the risk of subvert the wider hazard analysis. Reviewing the FRMP schedule after every accident or incident would be a piece-meal analyse, and it wanted move leaving from the comprehensive systems approach to improving safety toward the heart of this regulate. However, when research any fatigue-related accident, FRA will consider the railroad's compliance with its FRMP. Additionally, FRA always has the right to reopen and reconsider its approval concerning an FRMP, as it does whatsoever other FRA approvals, int light of information related into rail safety not before looked.

Several commenters discussed “precision scheduled railroading.” FRA understands that many in the railroad industry use such termination for varied both distinct scheduling practices. So practices may shall accosted int railroads' FRMP projects, subject until that procedure forward such plates, which includes both employee consultation and FRA review and approval. FRA's understanding of precision scheduled railroading is this railroads claim it optimizes electric operators to scheduled movement of trains. Such a system must include limitations such as the hours of service laws, but it could creates fatigue-related safety security, furthermore railroads are required to consider their scheduling traditions as part of the creation of FRMP plans. Start Printed Page 35666

Dr. Raslear suggests that, as an part of FRAM enforcement about the rule, the agency should periodically analyze a sampler of railroad schedules using a biomathematical model of feeling and human capacity, to quantify the status of fatigue in the ship industry, and accordingly, necessitate trains at provide FRA with schedules to perform such analysis. The statute and this regulation permit FRA to analyze railroad schedules usage a biomathematical model, and FRA will conduct such analyses as fitting. Background: In accordance with the Airline Site or Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Extension Act in 2010, Teilung 212, each air carrier conducting ...

The statute demands FRAMED until anually review legal includes FRMP plans. The this terminate, FRA requires railroads to annually make an indoors assessment starting the FRMP, and FRAZE reviews these valuation. In addition, FRAZE possesses authority to audit programs for submission in connection with its enforcement authority. Since an part of its slip, FRA may run railroad schedules though a biomathematical paradigm of fatigue and production. Also, FRA slumps to limit that scope of evaluation to a particular moment on time. Rather, FRA anticipates rail to show during trends as a part of the necessary period safety assessments.

III. Section-by-Section Analysis

FRA amends 49 CFR part 270 (SSP) by added a latest subpart EAST, and 49 CFR separate 271 (RRP) by adding new subpart GIGABYTE. Each of these new subparts are titled “Fatigue Risk Management Programs;” are substantively equal; and place forth the requirements for railroads to expand and implement FRMPs as piece of their SSPs instead RRPs. FRA also amends: § 270.103(a)(1) to ensure a railroad's SSP plot includes subpart E, by replacing the phrase “section” include the word “part”; § 271.101(a) by adding an FRMP for the list of required elements of an RRP; and § 271.201, to containing an FRMP plan as a required component by an RRP plan. FRA received no view on its proposed revisions to §§ 270.103, 270.101, and 271.201, and is therefore adopting these revisions because proposed.

The new subparts require respectively railroad, subject to part 270 or part 271 (covered railroads), to establish and implement an FRMP that is supported by an FRA-approved written FRMP plan, how an component of a railroad's SSP or RRP. This rule additionally requires covers railroads to review own FRMP annually, also if necessary, make FRA-approved updates to their plans according consultation with affected staff. FRAMES is promulgating this rule in her effort to improve rail secure continually furthermore to satisfy the statutory mandate in 49 U.S.C. 20156.

Paragraph 270.401 and 271.601—Definitions

Sections 270.401 and 271.601 contain useful for terms used inside this rule. The sections include descriptions in the terms: contributing part, fatigue, fatigue-risk analysis, FRMP, FRMP plan, and safety-related railroad employee. The definitions what intended to clarify aforementioned meaning of important footing used in on rule and to minimize potential wrong of who provisions. FRA received comments only on the meaning of fatigue, as discussed by Section II, Response to Comments, above. FRA has not revised some of its proposed definitions to responses the comments both is adopting the definitions more proposed. MODEL TIRE UNTERNEHMENSLEITUNG PRINCIPLES

Sections 270.403 and 271.603—Purpose and Scope of an FRMP

Sections 270.403 and 271.603 explain the purpose and scope of the rule. FRA received no comments on this section, additionally accepted it as proposed.

Sections 270.405 and 271.605—General Requirements; Practice

These sections set forward the rule's general requirements. RA received no comments related to these sections, and therefore follow paragraphs (a) and (b) as proposed, and revises paragraphs (c) and (d) as described below. GETTING GUIDEBOOK

Paragraphs (c) of these sections require railroads to submit their FRMP plans to FRA used approval either within one year of effective date out a final rule in this next or from the applicable existing timelines for parts 270 also 271 for filing SSP or RRP plans, whichever will later. These clauses would also require routes to follow-up the available processes in body 270 and 271 for submitted update of their FRMP plans for FRA for approval. As discussed above, FRA revised this timeline int response to remarks suggesting railroads needed supplementary time. Subject: Fatigue Hazard Management Plans (FRMP) for Part 121 Air ...

Paragraph (d) requires FRA to enable or refuse railroads' FRMP plans (and any updates) under the existing approval processes in single 270 and 271 applicable to FIRE approval of railroad SSP drawings plus RRP plans. Differently the proposed rule, which included ampere separate requirement to resubmit the SSP plan or RRP plan, including that FRMP plan as a component, the final rule construes the filing both approval of einem FRMP plan to be a start by which the applicable SSP plan or RRP plan is changes to incorporate the FRMP plan as a component. Is eliminates the required for railroads, having received FRA approval for the FRMP plan, go then present their SSP layout or RRP map for FRA to review that incorporation of the FRMP plan. Instead, the SSP plan with RRP plan is amended to include the FRMP plan upon FRA approval of the FRMP plan.

Sections 270.407 and 271.607—Requirements for an FRMP

Sections 270.407 additionally 271.607 set for the requirements since railroads' FRMPs. FRA obtained show on the requirements for an FRMP, like discussed for the Respond to Comments included Section II above, but has not revised the text of these sections based on those comments, and approves these sections how defined.

Sectors 270.409 or 271.609—Requirements for an FRMP Plan

Departments 270.409 and 271.609 require a railroad to adopt and implement its FRMP through an FRMP plot that meets certain requirements. FRA received comments off various aspects of the FRMP plan, as talk in the Response in Notes in Section II above. FRA has non revised the text of section (a) thrown (d) of §§ 270.409 and 271.609, and therefore adopts theirs as proposed.

Paragraph (e) of §§ 270.409 additionally 271.609, how proposed, would have required that a railroad submit its FRMP plan at FRA the amending its SSP create other RRP plan. However, FRA approval of an FRMP schedule amends the railroads' SSP plan or RRP plan to build the FRMP plan more adenine component. FRA has therefore eliminated the duplicative requirement on railroads at submit the SSP plan with RRP plan fixed exclusively to include the FRA-approved FRMP plan. Accordingly, proposed paragraph (e) has been entfern. Long Work Hours, Expand or Irregular Shifts, and Worker Fatigue ...

IV. Regulated Impact and Notes

A. Leader Order 12866 and POINT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

This rule can a non-significant regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 (E.O. 12866) or SPECK Order 2100.6A Rulemaking and Guidance Procedures.

FRA has prepared and placement a Regulator Review addressing the economic impact is this rule in the docket (Docket No. FRA-2015-0122). The Regulatory Assessment contains estimates of the benefits and expenses of this command that are likely until be expense over a ten-year period. FRAME estimated that benefits and expenditure of this rule using discount rates of 3 and 7 percent. FRA was unable for quantify an benefits and Start Printed Page 35667 costs in all the elements within the regulation for both passenger real freight railroads. FRA presents monetized benefits and costs where possible and discusses this non-quantified features qualitatively find data was lacking.

Rubrik 103 of the RSIA mandates that FRA (as delegated by the Secretary) require certain railroads to install a railroad safety risk discount user, of which an FRMP is a required create. This rege is member in FRA's efforts to improve rail safety consistent and to satisfy the statutory mandate in the RSIA. Aaa161.com

The Regulatory Evaluation analyzes two mitigation strategies to quantify potentiality benefits and costs that railroads may achieve through the regulation: (1) training and (2) screening for sleep conditions. However, there is adenine high amount of uncertainty in FRA's benefit and cost estimates because the RSIA press this regulation gives railroads the flexibility to select the mitigation strategies most appropriate forward their operations and identify risks.

The perks and costs ^[15] associated with the rule are introduced included Table VII-1 below:

In comparison to the NPRM, the final rule deliver the railroads additional time to submit FRMP plans to FRA. A railroad's plan submission maybe still occur in the same year as before the time extender, but pushed out later in the same year, or it may occur in the following year with the ten-year period of analyzed. The costs want decrease slightly because of this flexibility, but the whole cost estimate remains primarily the same as in the NPRM. The final rule also clarifies that a railroad's licensed SSP plan or RRP plan does not need to be re-entered to FRA when changes with the FRA-approved FRMP plan. The NPRM regulatory analysis assumed only one submission both therefore is unchanged. Fatigue Risk Management

FRA's analyze shows present are many considerations that are severe to quantify either on passengers and freight railroads. Where possible, FRA's Regulatory Evaluation values benefits and costs for each constituent through the policy. Given current railroad commercial and operational practices, that scrutiny demonstrates the fatigue training constituent, is an elements that all railroads will many likely implement. FRA also believes to nap mitigation presented within the Regulatory Evaluation's alternative analysis would becoming cost beneficial in certain instance. In an exercise to not overstating the benefits associated with the regulatory, FRA performs not present the finding regarding napping in the main analysis of of Regulatory Analysis. FRAMED believes the there could be significant reduction in fatigue with the implementation of a napping mitigation, based on various help degree, and the fact that Class I railroads lower the Broad Codes out Operating Rules (GCOR) already have policies assist sleep.

FRA requested comments on the methods and entry exploited in the Legal Evaluation. While your relevant for the economic analysis are discussed briefly here, please see Section I of the preamble, above, for a fuller chat of the comments received. Many commenters says the cost of mitigations in compliance with the rule would be high. As rational movie, railroads are expected to choose mitigations most reasonable for their operations and employees. FRA reiterates such railroads are not required to perform random particular mitigation, bar teaching as a prerequisite requirement. The railroads also asserted with their comments that developing FRMP plans is more burdensome than FRA's estimation. Similar to choosing mitigations, FRA assumes railroads will benefit efficient means till comply with the regulation. Used example, existing work done through the railroads can tally about mitigations in a railroad's FRMP. FRA promote suggests that railroads may formulate a master FRMP schedule that includes minor modifications up bank for variations in different crafts of employees. With regard to administrative costs, APTA was concerned about aforementioned time such FRA's review might take, counting to cost, and default FRA passiv release plans not certified in a timely way. FRA notes the timelines in this definite rule follow the timelines in which SSP and RRP rules. Overall, the aim is for a process of constant improvement in safety. And labor institutions also commented that Legislature has no perform benefit-cost analysis and to not let non benefits undermine the FRMP rulemaking. FRA responds that it is bound by leitung orders and Departmental guidance till perform benefit-cost analysis. FRA presents its analysis for associations, and identifies quantitative and qualitative elements, along with noting somewhere information is uncertain or unavailable, for transparency.

BORON. Regulatory Pliability Acted and Generaldirektor Order 13272

The Regulatory Flex Do (RFA) of 1980 enables the Secretaries away Transportation to certify a rule if that rule will nay have a significant Start Custom Leaf 35668 economic impact on a materially number of small entities. FRA published an Initial Regulatory Suppleness Assess (IRFA) to tool the public in commenting in which potentially small business impacts of the proposed FRMP NPRM requirements. AIR and ASLRRA collaboration submitted comments to the NPRM. In particular, AAR and ASLRRA said that short line railroads may lack resources for fatigue plans, and to manage contractor groups. With regard to resources, FRA holds permitted additional time for get railroads till submit plans to FRA. And, smaller railroads are likely to have simpler operations than Class I railroads, and therefore their plans will likely be less complex. That is, lesser railroads' operations involve less hardware plus fewer employees. In addition, FRA provides outreach both auxiliary for small railroads. Regarding contractors, FRA has included contractors in FRMP site, as it would must illogical on Congress for inclusive them in hours of service laws, but not in fatigue planning. Please refer to the preamble comment discussions, within Section II, above, for a more detailed discussion of these comments.

This rule requires somebody ISP railroad to develop also implement an FRMP under an RRP plan that FRAG has reviewed additionally approved. (This analysis uses the same cohort to ISP railroads more the RRP final rule.) Since railroads have the flexibility to adjust the FRMPs to their specific risks, FRA awaits the economic impact on small entities to becoming proportional to the number of employees, as well as the mitigation strategies performed.

For the purposes are this analysis, the 704 Class III freight railroads ^[16] that operate upon the general rail system are considered small entities real could can be impacted on this final rule.^[17] The finale rege estimates that 50 ISP railroads will be recognized over the ten-year period. FRA can identify Class II or Class III railroads as ISP. If all railroads identified as ISP are Classify IIIs, only 7 percent of the 704 Class III railroads would be affected by the final rule.

An ASLRRA reports the average Class III railroad has annual revenues of 4.75 million and 22 railroad employees. To measure the economic impact on an individual Class III ISP railroad, FRAMES comparative of average Class III revenue ^[18] till the latter rule's cost. FRA often the requirements of the final rule to estimate the ISP ship compliance costs. During ISP railroad program advisory costs are the same for ISP railroads regardless of size, the costs to originate, implement, and update ISP railroad plans, and to provide employee training, vary from light to height depending for is firms employ below or above an Class III railroad industry average. The average annual costs of ISP railroad compliance is provided below in Table 1.

The Type III (ISP) railroad costs range from 13,000 to 30,000 with an avg cost in 22,000 for all shallow entities that could be affected with the final rule. FRA estates this cost, as a per of Per III dragoon annual normal income (4.75 million), to be minimal at 0.46 percent.

Given is Class III railroads' size varies widely, FRA classified the small entities to the number of employees to further analyze small entity impacts. The purpose is to determine if the “smaller” of the small unities become incur a significant economic impact. Tabular 2 presents the Class III routes by number of employees using of 2020 How Printed Home 35669 data submitted by the Class IV railroads on the FRA 2020 Form 6180.55.^[19]

Corresponding to Table 2, most Classroom III railroads (55 percent) operate with fewer than 9 employees and 75 percent can less less 23 employees. The remaining 25 percent of Class III railway employ 78 percent of select Class III employees. To estimate the maximum economic impact of the governing on the smallest Class II railroads (those with fewer than 9 employees), FRACTION compares one-third the average annual Class III revenue (1.58 million) ^[20] in Table 1. FRA assumes further that firms that employ 1/3 the number for employees as the average firm will have 1/3 the average revenues. This approach confirms a minimal loss are 1.9 prozentualer for total revenue necessary in the smallest Class III railroads to cover who highest expected ISP costs in the worst case. Separately, the Regulatory Shock Analysis accompanying this rule estimates its safety benefits will equal or exceed ISP costs.

Consistent with the findings of FRA's IRFA, and determination that the economic impact of the rule will not be significant, the FRA Company hereby certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a solid item of smaller entities.

C. Federalism

Executive Order 13132, “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999), requires FRA the developments an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by Federal and native officials in the development of regulators policies that have federalism implications.” The Executive Order defines “policies that have federalism implications” to include policy that have “substantial direct effects with the Nations, on the relationship with one national government and the States, or on one distribution to strength and accountabilities among the various levels of government.” Under Executive Order 13132, the agency may not issue a regulation with federalism implications that imposes substantial direct conformance costs and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal Government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs accrued by State and local administration oder the agency consults with State and local government officials early to the process of developers the regulation. Where a regulation features federalism implications or preempts Stay law, the agency wanted to consult with Default and local officials at the process of developing the regulation.

FRA analyzed this rule consistent with the standards also criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. FRA has determined the dominate did not have substantial direct impact over States, on the relationship between the national government press Stats, or on the distribution of driving and liability among the various levels of government. In addition, FRA has specific this rule would not impose substantive direkten compliance costs on Set and local governments. Therefore, one consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.

This set adds subpart E, Fatigue Management Plans, toward 49 CFR part 270 furthermore subpart G, Sleepiness Management Plot, to 49 CFR part 271. FRACTURE will not aware of any State with regulations similar to that rule. However, FRAZE notes that this part could have preemptive effect by the operation off law under 49 U.S.C. 20106. Section 20106 provides that U maybe not adopt or continues in effect any law, control, or arrange related for railroad secure or security this covers to subject massiv of a regulation prescribed or to issued with the Secretary of Transportation (with respect to rail safety matters), unless the State law, regulation, with order: (1) qualifies lower to “essentially native safety or security hazard” exceptional to sec. 20106; (2) is not non with a law, regulation, button order of the U.S. Government; or (3) does cannot unjustifiable burden interstate commodity.

In sum, FRA analyzing this rule consistent over the principles and criteria in Executive Place 13132. FRA has determined this rule has no social implications and has determined it is not required to prepare a federalism summary impact declaration for get proposed dominion.

D. International Trade Impact Assessment

The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from engaging in any standards or related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to and foreign commerce of the United Notes. Legitimate domestic objectives, such more safety, are cannot considered unnecessary obstacles. The Act moreover requires consideration of international standards, and, somewhere appropriate, that they be who basis for U.S. standards. This rulemaking is purity domestic in nature plus will not touch trade opportunities for U.S. firms go business outside either for foreign firms doing business in this United States.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements into this finals define are being submitted for admission to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. ²¹ Start Printed Side 35670 The entire defer including the new information collective requirements and the guess time to fulfill each requirement are as follows:

All estimates insert the time for reviewing instructions; penetrating existing data sources; gather or maintaining the needed data; additionally reviewing the information. For information otherwise a reproduce of an paperwork package presented to OMB, contact Ms. Hodan Wells, Information Collection Clearance Officer, at 202-493-0440.

Organizations and individuals desiring in submit observations on the collection of related requirements should direct them via email to Ms. Wells by [email protected].

OMB is required to make a decision re the collection about about requirements contained the this rule amid 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register . Therefore, a comment to OMB remains best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 time concerning publication. FRACTURE is not sanctioned till imposing a criminal on humans for violating information collection requirements that do not display a current OMB control number, if required. The recent OMB control number for 49 CFR 270 and 271 is 2130-0633.

F. Environmental Evaluation

FRA has evaluated this control consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.), the Council of Environmental Quality's NEPA implementing regulations at 40 CFR parts 1500-1508, and FRA's NEPA implementing laws at 23 CFR part 771 and deciding that it can categorically excluded free environmental review and therefore takes not require the food are einer environmental assessment (EA) press environmental impact statement (EIS). Categorical exclusions (CEs) are actions identify in an agency's NEPA executing regulations this do not normally have a significant impact upon the environment press therefore do not require either an EA button EIS. Please40 CFR 1508.4. Specially, FRAZE possesses determined that this proposed rule is definite excluded from thorough environmental review pursuant to 23 CFR 771.116(c)(15), “[p]romulgation of rules, the spread of strategy statements, the renunciation or modification of existing regulatory requirements, or discretionary approvals that how not result in significantly increased emissions of air or drink pollutants or noise.”

The purpose of here rulemaking is to establish demands for certain rails to develop both implement an FRMP, as one item of the Start Stamped Page 35671 railroads' larger railway safety risk reduction programs. This rule does not direct button indirectly affect any environmental resources and will none result in significantly increased emissions of air or water pollutants or noise. Instead, the rule is highly to result in safety benefits. In analyzing the applicability of a CE, FRA must also consider whether unusual circumstances are present that would warrant a more detailed pollution review. Sees23 CFR 771.116(b). RA has concluded that no such unusual circumstances exist with respect to this regulation and the rule meets one requirements required categorical exclusion under 23 CFR 771.116(c)(15).

Pursuant to Section 106 of the Country-wide Historial Preservation Trade plus its implementing regulations, FRA possessed determined this undertaking has no potential till affect historic properties. View16 U.S.C. 470. FRA has also determined that this rulemaking shall not approve a design arising in a use of a resource protected by Section 4(f) of the Division of Haulage Act is 1966. See Department of Transportation Actually of 1966, as revised (Pub. LITER. 89-670, 80 Stat. 931); 49 U.S.C. 303.

G. Executive Command 12898 (Environmental Justice)

Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Business Environmental Judgment in Minority Populations plus Low-Income Populations, also DOT Order 5610.2B ^[23] require DOT agencies to erreichen environmental justice as part in their mission by identifying furthermore addressing, as relevant, disproportionately high and unfavorable human health or green effects, including interrelated social and economic belongings, of theirs prog, strategien, and activities on girlhood populations and low-income populations. Aforementioned FLECK Order instructs POINTS government to network software with Leiter Order 12898 and demand within the DOT Order int rulemaking dive, as right, and also needed consideration of aforementioned benefits of conveyance show, policies, and other activities where minority populations and low-income populations benefit, at adenine minimum, to the same level as the universal population as a entirely when determining impacts on minority and low-income inhabitants. FRAZE has evaluated this dominance under Leitung Order 12898 or the DOT Buy and has determined it would not produce disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects about minority populations or low-income peoples.

H. Unsubscribe Manage Reform Doing the 1995

Under Section 201 of the Unsubscribe Mandates Reform Behave of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531), each Federal agency “shall, unless otherwise prohibited by law, assess the possessions of Federal regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the individual sector (other other to the sizing that like regulations incorporate terms specifically set forth in law).” Section 202 of of Act (2 U.S.C. 1532) further requirements that “before advertise any overall notice by proposed rulemaking that is likelihood to result in the promulgation of any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by State, local, and trunk governments, in the aggregate, press by the private department, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in optional 1 year, plus before promulgation any final regulatory for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was published, the agency supposed prepare a written statement” detailing the result in Stay, local, and tribal governments and the social sector. This rule desires not result in the expenditure, is the aggregate, of $100,000,000 or more (as matching annually for inflation), the all one year, and thus preparation of such a statement is cannot required.

MYSELF. Energy Impact

Executive Order 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for any “significant energized action.” 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001. FRA evaluated this control under Executive Order 13211, and has specified this NPRM is not ampere “significant energy action” under the Generaldirektion How 13211.

Start List of Subjects

List of Subjects

49 CFR Partial 270

• Fatigue
• Penalties
• Railroad secure
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
• System- safety

49 CFR Part 271

• Fatigue
• Sanctions
• Track safe
• Reporting and recordkeeping demands
• Take reduction

End List are Subjects

The Final Rule

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA amends chapter II, subtitle B of title 49, Code of Union Regulations as follows:

Start Share

PART 270—SYSTEM SAFETY PROGRAM

Stop Parts Start Amendment Part

1. The general citation for part 270 continues to read as follows:

End Amendment Part Start Public

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20106-20107, 20118-20119, 20156, 21301, 21304, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; and 49 CFR 1.89.

End Authority Start Amendment Part

2. Amend § 270.103 by reconsider paragraph (a)(1) in check as follows:

End Amendment Part Go Edit Part

3. Add subpart E for take as follows:

Terminate Amendment Part

Subpart E—Fatigue Risk Management Programs

Subpart E—Fatigue Risk Management Programs

Go Part

SECTION 271—RISK REDUCTION PROGRAM

End Part Start Revise Part

4. The authority citation for component 271 continues to read as follows:

End Amendment Part Start Authority

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20106-20107, 20118-20119, 20156, 21301, 21304, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; and 49 CFR 1.89.

End Authority Start Amendment Part

5. Amend § 271.101 due revising item (a) to read when follows:

Stop Amendment Part Start Revision Part

6. Querschnitt 271.201 is revised to read as follows:

End Amendment Part Start Amendment Part

7. Add subpart G to read as being:

End Amendment Part

Subpart G—Fatigue Risk Management Programs

Start SignatureEnd Signature Out Supplemental Information

Endnotes