Security Training for Surface Transportation Employees; Compliance Dates; Amendment
| Published date | 26 October 2020 |
| Citation | 85 FR 67681 |
| Record Number | 2020-23064 |
| Section | Rules and Regulations |
| Court | Transportation Security Administration |
67681
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
1
85 FR 16456.
2
See, e.g., 85 FR at 16469.
3
85 FR 25315.
4
See id. for table of extended deadlines for
compliance.
5
The STSAC was established under the authority
of Section 1969 of the TSA Modernization Act
(Division K, Title I), of the FAA Reauthorization Act
of 2018 (Pub. L. 115–254, 132 Stat. 3186, Oct. 5,
2018). Section 1969 amended Subtitle A of title IV
of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 201
et seq.). The statute exempts the committee, and
any subcommittees, from the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.). The STSAC is
chartered for the purpose of advising, consulting
with, reporting to, and making recommendations to
the TSA Administrator on surface transportation
security matters, including the development,
refinement, and implementation of policies,
programs, initiatives, rulemakings, and security
directives pertaining to surface transportation
security. Additional information on the STSAC is
available on TSA’s website at: https://www.tsa.gov/
for-industry/surface-transportation-security.
6
See Docket No. TSA–2015–0001–0045 at
Regulations.gov for Letter from Thomas Farmer of
the Association of American Railroads; Polly
Hanson of the American Public Transportation
Association; Chief Ronald Pavlick of the
Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation
Authority; Colonel (Ret.) Michael Licata, Academy
Bus; and J.R. Gelnar of the American Short Line and
Regional Railroad Association (dated Aug. 10,
2020).
7
Id.
8
Under the rule, owner/operators have up to one
year (12 months) after their security training
program is approved by TSA to provide initial
training to all of their security-sensitive employees.
See §1570.111. Once the proposed program is
submitted to TSA, the agency has 60 days (2
months) to review and approve a security program,
with the ability to extend the review period and/
or require the owner/operator to modify the
program, which would stay the 60-day period.
Thus, from the date the program is submitted to
Continued
submitted under paragraph (b) of this
section, or for a maximum quantity of
mineral production as determined by
the BLM.
[FR Doc. 2020–23003 Filed 10–23–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–84–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
49 CFR Part 1570
[Docket No. TSA–2015–0001]
RIN 1652–AA55
Security Training for Surface
Transportation Employees;
Compliance Dates; Amendment
AGENCY
: Transportation Security
Administration, DHS.
ACTION
: Final rule.
SUMMARY
: This final rule amends the
‘‘Security Training for Surface
Transportation Employees’’ (Security
Training) final rule (published March
23, 2020, and amended May 1, 2020) to
extend the compliance dates by which
certain requirements must be
completed. TSA is aware that many
owner/operators within the scope of this
rule’s applicability may be unable to
meet the compliance deadline for
submission of the required security
training programs to TSA for approval
because of the impact of COVID–19 as
well as actions taken at various levels of
government to address this public
health crisis. In response, TSA is
extending the compliance deadline for
submission of the required security
training program to no later than March
22, 2021. Should TSA determine that an
additional extension of time is
necessary based upon the impact of the
COVID–19 public health crisis, TSA
will publish a document in the Federal
Register announcing an updated
compliance date for this requirement.
DATES
: Effective Date: This rule is
effective October 26, 2020.
Compliance Dates: Compliance date
for submission of security training
program to TSA under § 1570.19(b)(1)
and (2): March 22, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
:
Harry Schultz (TSA; Policy, Plans, and
Engagement, Surface Division) or David
Kasminoff (TSA, Senior Counsel;
Regulations and Security Standards;
Office of Chief Counsel) by telephone at
(571) 227–5563 or email to
SecurityTrainingPolicy@tsa.dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
I. Background
TSA published the Security Training
Final Rule on March 23, 2020.
1
This
rule requires owner/operators of higher-
risk freight railroad carriers, public
transportation agencies (including rail
mass transit and bus systems), passenger
railroad carriers, and over-the-road bus
companies, to provide TSA-approved
security training to employees
performing security-sensitive functions.
As published on March 23, 2020, TSA
scheduled the final rule to take effect on
June 22, 2020, with the first compliance
deadline set for July 22, 2020.
2
On May
1, 2020, TSA delayed the effective date
of the final rule to September 21, 2020,
in recognition of the potential impact of
COVID–19 measures and related strain
on resources for owner/operators
required to comply with the regulation.
3
TSA revised all compliance dates
within the rule to reflect the new
effective date.
4
II. Request for Delay
On August 10, 2020, several members
of the Surface Transportation Security
Advisory Committee (STSAC)
5
submitted a request to the TSA
Administrator to further delay the
effective date of the Security Training
Final Rule.
6
In their letter,
representatives from the three modes
affected by this rulemaking argued that
the effective date should be extended
because they are unable to comply with
the regulation’s requirements due to the
impact of the COVID–19 public health
crisis as well as the need to prepare for,
and address, the impact of
contingencies such as the hurricane and
tropical storm season.
They also indicated a need to focus on
training to address these issues, such as
employee responsibilities for personal
medical screening, workplace hygiene,
social distancing, and repeated
cleanings daily of transportation
vehicles and facilities used by co-
workers, employees in other sectors,
and the public generally. They indicated
that the responsible leads and
supporting staffs necessary to develop
and implement a security training
program that meets TSA’s requirements
are the same individuals who are
currently focusing their efforts on
assuring worker and public health and
safety while sustaining operations
throughout the continuing national
public health emergency caused by
COVID–19.’’
7
The letter also argued that
some of the activities in response to
other issues and contingencies have a
security benefit. For example, their
actions to address safety and security
during ongoing demonstrations have
resulted in a positive security benefit.
III. Amending Compliance Date
TSA recognizes the impact of COVID–
19 on our surface stakeholders and the
need to provide some relief at a time
when many owner/operators are
simultaneously leveraging a range of
resources to address multiple
challenging circumstances, and
struggling financially and limiting
operations due to the effects of the
COVID–19 public health crisis. After
considering the current operational
environment and the purpose of this
regulation, TSA has decided to maintain
the current effective date for the rule but
to further extend the compliance
deadline in § 1570.109(b) for security
program submission to March 22, 2021.
This extension would provide the
industry with a total of 180 days of
relief for submission of security training
programs as compared to the original
deadline of September 20, 2020, and
extend the deadline for initial training
of all employees in security-sensitive
positions into the late spring and early
summer of 2022.
8
TSA believes this
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1
67682
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
TSA, owner/operators will have at least 14 months
to train their employees.
9
The rule sets the criteria for applicability, but
requires owner/operators to determine if the criteria
applies to their operations. For new and modified
operations, owner/operators are required to notify
TSA within 90 days before commencing their
operations. See §1570.105(b). This provision is
intended to cover situations where a route is
changed or cargo transported is modified in such
a way as to trigger applicability. It also applies,
however, to the current situation where an owner/
operator may have cut routes or closed their
business completely due to COVID–19. As the
economy recovers and operations resume, owner/
operators will be required to notify TSA in advance
of commencing operations that would trigger
applicability of the rule’s requirements.
10
The last two requirements are an extension of
current requirements applicable to railroads and
rail transit systems (under 49 CFR part 1580 as
promulgated in 2008) to higher-risk bus transit
systems and OTRBs.
11
See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), (d).
12
See 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
13
See 5 U.S.C. 603, 604.
14
See E.O. 13132, sec. 6.
action addresses the most burdensome
requirements in the rule, such as
submitting security training programs to
TSA for approval and training
employees in security-sensitive
positions, without delaying other key
elements of the rule. Should TSA
determine that an additional extension
of time for submission of the security
training program is necessary based
upon the impact of the COVID–19
public health crisis, TSA will publish a
document in the Federal Register
announcing an updated compliance
date for this requirement. TSA is not
extending the deadlines for owner/
operators to report to TSA whether they
fall within the rule’s applicability
(§ 1570.105),
9
to identify a security
coordinator (§ 1570.201), and to report
security incidents to TSA
(§ 1570.203).
10
IV. Regulatory Analysis
A. Administrative Procedure Act
TSA takes this action without prior
notice and public comment. Sections
553(b) and (d) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) authorize
agencies to dispense with certain
rulemaking procedures when they find
good cause to do so. Under section
553(b), the requirements of notice and
opportunity to comment do not apply
when the agency for good cause finds
that these procedures are
‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest.’’ Section 553(d)
allows an agency, upon finding good
cause, to make a rule effective
immediately, thereby avoiding the 30-
day delayed effective date requirement
in section 553.
This final rule recognizes the need to
extend the compliance deadline for the
requirement in the Security Training
Final Rule that would be most difficult
for owner/operators to implement
during the current COVID–19 public
health crisis and the significant
disruption and uncertainty in both
private and local government operations
caused by this crisis. Specifically, TSA
is extending the period during which
owner/operators must develop a
security training program for their
employees and submit the program to
TSA for approval. Delaying this
requirement also effectively delays the
deadline for training employees.
TSA has good cause to delay the
compliance deadline for submission of
security training programs without
advance notice and comment or a
delayed effective date.
11
To delay taking
this action while waiting for public
comment would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest. The
owner/operators subject to the
requirements of the final rule need
immediate certainty regarding the
deadlines of the final rule so that they
may focus on other urgent issues
affecting their operations.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA)
12
requires Federal agencies to
consider the impact of paperwork and
other information collection burdens
imposed on the public and, under the
provisions of PRA section 3507(d),
obtain approval from the OMB for each
collection of information. OMB has
approved the collection of information
for the Security Training Final Rule
under OMB control number 1652–0066.
While this rule delays the timing of
submission, it does not modify the
collection burdens that OMB has
already approved.
C. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Assessment
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review) and 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying costs and benefits, reducing
costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting
flexibility.
Executive Order 12866 defines
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as one
that is likely to result in a rule that may
(1) have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
state, local, or Tribal governments or
communities; (2) create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by
another agency; (3) materially alter the
budgetary impact of entitlements,
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the
rights or obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy
issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order. The
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has not designated this rule a
‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ under
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly,
OMB has not reviewed it.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act Assessment
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub.
L. 104–121), requires Federal agencies
to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small businesses, small
government jurisdictions, and small
organizations during the development of
their rules. This final rule, however,
makes changes for which notice and
comment are not necessary.
Accordingly, DHS is not required to
prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis.
13
E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
A rule has federalism implications
under E.O. 13132, if it has a substantial
direct effect on State governments, on
the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. DHS has analyzed
this rule under E.O. 13132 and
determined that although this rule
affects the States, it does not impose
substantial direct compliance costs or
preempt State law.
14
The rule relieves
burdens on States.
F. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (UMRA) requires Federal
agencies to assess the effects of their
regulatory actions. In particular, the
UMRA addresses actions that may result
in the expenditure by a State, local, or
Tribal government, in the aggregate, or
by the private sector of $100 million
(adjusted for inflation) or more in any
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1
67683
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
one year. This final rule will not result
in such an expenditure.
G. Environment
TSA has reviewed this rulemaking for
purposes of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C.
4321–4347) and has determined that
this action will not have a significant
effect on the human environment. This
action is covered by categorical
exclusion (CATEX) number A3(e) in
DHS Management Directive 023–01
(formerly Management Directive
5100.1), Environmental Planning
Program, which guides TSA compliance
with NEPA.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 1570
Commuter bus systems, Crime, Fraud,
Hazardous materials transportation,
Motor carriers, Over-the-Road bus
safety, Over-the-Road buses, Public
transportation, Public transportation
safety, Rail hazardous materials
receivers, Rail hazardous materials
shippers, Rail transit systems, Railroad
carriers, Railroad safety, Railroads,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Transportation facility, Transportation
Security-Sensitive Materials.
The Amendments
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Transportation Security
Administration amends 49 CFR part
1570 as follows:
■1. The authority citation for part 1570
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 18 U.S.C. 842, 845; 46 U.S.C.
70105; 49 U.S.C. 114, 5103a, 40113, and
46105; Pub. L. 108–90 (117 Stat. 1156, Oct.
1, 2003), sec. 520 (6 U.S.C. 469), as amended
by Pub. L. 110–329 (122 Stat. 3689, Sept. 30,
2008) sec. 543 (6 U.S.C. 469); Pub. L. 110–
53 (121 Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007) secs. 1402
(6 U.S.C. 1131), 1405 (6 U.S.C. 1134), 1408
(6 U.S.C. 1137), 1413 (6 U.S.C. 1142), 1414
(6 U.S.C. 1143), 1501 (6 U.S.C. 1151), 1512
(6 U.S.C. 1162), 1517 (6 U.S.C. 1167), 1522
(6 U.S.C. 1170), 1531 (6 U.S.C. 1181), and
1534 (6 U.S.C. 1184).
■2. Amend § 1570.109 by revising
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) to read as
follows:
§ 1570.109 Submission and approval.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Submit its program to TSA for
approval no later than March 22, 2021.
(2) If commencing or modifying
operations so as to be subject to the
requirements of subpart B to 49 CFR
parts 1580, 1582, or 1584 after March
22, 2021, submit a training program to
TSA no later than 90 calendar days
before commencing new or modified
operations.
* * * * *
David P. Pekoske,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020–23064 Filed 10–21–20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 9110–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 200623–0167; RTID 0648–
XA576]
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Atlantic Bluefish Fishery;
Quota Transfer From VA to NC
AGENCY
: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION
: Notification; quota transfer.
SUMMARY
: NMFS announces that the
Commonwealth of Virginia is
transferring a portion of its 2020
commercial bluefish quota to the State
of North Carolina. This quota
adjustment is necessary to comply with
the Atlantic Bluefish Fishery
Management Plan quota transfer
provisions. This announcement informs
the public of the revised commercial
bluefish quotas for Virginia and North
Carolina.
DATES
: Effective October 22, 2020
through December 31, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
:
Laura Hansen, Fishery Management
Specialist, (978) 281–9225.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
Regulations governing the Atlantic
bluefish fishery are found in 50 CFR
648.160 through 648.167. These
regulations require annual specification
of a commercial quota that is
apportioned among the coastal states
from Maine through Florida. The
process to set the annual commercial
quota and the percent allocated to each
state is described in § 648.162, and the
final 2020 allocations were published
on June 29, 2020 (85 FR 38794).
The final rule implementing
Amendment 1 to the Bluefish Fishery
Management Plan (FMP) published in
the Federal Register on July 26, 2000
(65 FR 45844), and provided a
mechanism for transferring bluefish
quota from one state to another. Two or
more states, under mutual agreement
and with the concurrence of the NMFS
Greater Atlantic Regional Administrator,
can request approval to transfer or
combine bluefish commercial quota
under § 648.162(e)(1)(i) through (iii).
The Regional Administrator must
approve any such transfer based on the
criteria in § 648.162(e). In evaluating
requests to transfer a quota or combine
quotas, the Regional Administrator shall
consider whether: The transfer or
combinations would preclude the
overall annual quota from being fully
harvested; the transfer addresses an
unforeseen variation or contingency in
the fishery; and the transfer is consistent
with the objectives of the FMP and the
Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Virginia is transferring 25,000 lb
(11,340 kg) of bluefish commercial
quota to North Carolina through mutual
agreement of the states. This transfer
was requested to ensure that North
Carolina would not exceed its 2020 state
quota. The revised bluefish quotas for
2020 are: Virginia, 253,682 lb (115,068
kg) and North Carolina, 971,058 lb
(440,464 kg).
Classification
NMFS issues this action pursuant to
section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. This action is required by 50 CFR
648.162(e)(1)(i) through (iii), which was
issued pursuant to section 304(b), and is
exempted from review under Executive
Order 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: October 22, 2020.
Jennifer M. Wallace,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–23759 Filed 10–22–20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1
