OMB Approves DOT Rulemaking Procedure Final Rule

Yesterday the OMB’s Office of  Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) announced that it had approved a final rulemaking from the DOT’s Office of the Secretary on “Administrative Rulemaking, Guidance, and Enforcement Procedures”. The final rule was sent to OMB on February 24^th, 2026. The notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) was published on May 16^th, 2025.

According to the Spring 2025 Unified Agenda entry for this rulemaking:

“This rulemaking would reinstate and expound upon procedural reforms for the Department’s rulemakings, guidance documents, and enforcement actions rescinded by a final rule published by the Department on April 2, 2021, Administrative Rulemaking, Guidance, and Enforcement Procedures (86 FR 17292). Accordingly, this proposed rule would revise and update the Department’s internal policies and procedures relating to the issuance of rulemaking documents. In addition, this rulemaking would update the Department’s procedural requirements governing the review and clearance of guidance documents, and the initiation and conduct of enforcement actions, including administrative enforcement proceedings and judicial enforcement actions brought in Federal court.”

As this final rule outlines essentially internal rules for DOT, I do not expect to cover this in any detail when it is published in the next week of two. At a minimum, I will note its publication in the appropriate Short Takes post.

DOT Sends Administrative Procedures Final Rule to OMB

Yesterday the OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) announced that it had received a final rule from the DOT’s Office of the Secretary (OS) on “Administrative Rulemaking, Guidance, and Enforcement Procedures”. The notice of proposed rulemaking was published on May 16^th, 2025. Interestingly, even though the NPRM was published before the Spring 2025 Unified Agenda (published in September 2025), that NPRM was listed as being projected for publication in July 2025.

According to the Spring 2025 Unified Agenda entry for this rulemaking:

“This rulemaking would reinstate and expound upon procedural reforms for the Department’s rulemakings, guidance documents, and enforcement actions rescinded by a final rule published by the Department on April 2, 2021, Administrative Rulemaking, Guidance, and Enforcement Procedures (86 FR 17292) [link added]. Accordingly, this proposed rule would revise and update the Department’s internal policies and procedures relating to the issuance of rulemaking documents. In addition, this rulemaking would update the Department’s procedural requirements governing the review and clearance of guidance documents, and the initiation and conduct of enforcement actions, including administrative enforcement proceedings and judicial enforcement actions brought in Federal court.”

That 2021 rulemaking was part of the Biden Administration’s effort to remove much of 45’s regulatory agenda. Specifically, that Biden Administration rulemaking addressed an earlier DOT/OS rulemaking (84 FR 71714) from the previous administration. The preamble to the 2021 rulemaking noted that:

“Many of the policies and procedures codified at 49 CFR part 5 were prompted by Executive orders that have since been revoked by E.O. 13992.^[1] As a result, the Department will rescind those policies and procedures, or portions thereof, that implemented or enforced any of the revoked orders. This final rule removes from 49 CFR part 5 those provisions that reflect revoked policies and procedures that are no longer in effect.”

This is one of the problems with relying on executive orders as the authority for issuing regulations. It is relatively easy for the next administration to come in and revoke/change those regulations. In this case, since this rule only directly impacts internal DOT processes, this is more of a storm in a tea pot issue, but it does reflect significant changes in regulatory intent, and those changes are already in place and are already affecting DOT policy and rulemaking regardless of the presence or absence of this rule.

I will not be covering this final rule in any detail, but I would expect to report its publication in the appropriate Short Takes post.

DOT Publishes National Strategy for TDI RFI Notice

 Today, the DOT’s Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology (OST-R) published a request for information (RFI) in the Federal Register (91 FR 5150-5151) on “Request for Information-Research To Support Establishing a National Strategy for Transportation Digital Infrastructure”. This RFI is seeking public and stakeholder input on the research and development activities needed to modernize the nation's transportation system through the application of digital infrastructure at scale.

The RFI is looking for responses to questions in four key topic areas:

• Research, Development and Deployment,

• System Architecture, Interoperability and Standards,

• Artificial Intelligence and Automation, and

• Data Governance, Privacy, and Cybersecurity.

The last topic area includes two specific cybersecurity related questions:

The last topic area includes two specific cybersecurity related questions:

What data governance principles, access controls, and cybersecurity measures are needed to ensure trust, accountability, and privacy?

How should U.S. DOT apply the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) to TDI development and deployment?

In my opinion there should be an additional cybersecurity question added:

“Should DOT seek to establish a TDI related vulnerability disclosure process, or should it actively promote the use of CISA’s vulnerability reporting process.”

OST-R is soliciting public feedback. They request submissions be made in MS Word format and sent via email to DI-Strategy-RFI@dot.gov. Comments should be submitted by March 6^th, 2026

OMB Approves DOT Rulemaking NPRM

On Friday the OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) announced that it had approved a notice of proposed rulemaking from DOT’s Office of the Secretary on “Administrative Rulemaking, Guidance, and Enforcement Procedures”. The NPRM was sent to OIRA on March 25^th, 2025.

This rulemaking was not listed in the Fall 2024 Unified Agenda, almost certainly because this is a new initiative by the incoming administration. Back in March  Secretary Duffy issued DOT Order 2100.6B on “Rulemaking and Guidance Procedures.” That order superseded DOT Order 2100.6A that was published in June 2021. While the details of this rulemaking may end up being somewhat Trumpian, this is a relatively normal internal procedure update for a new administration. I will not be covering this rulemaking in any detail, but I will note its publication in the appropriate ‘Short Takes’ post.

DOT Sends Administrative Rulemaking Update to OMB

Yesterday the OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) announced that it had received a notice of proposed rulemaking from DOT on “Administrative Rulemaking, Guidance, and Enforcement Procedures”. This rulemaking was not published in the Fall 2024 Unified Agenda, but it would presumably be an update to a final rule of the same title published on April 2^nd, 2021.

Earlier this month, Secretary Duffy issued DOT Order 2100.6B on “Rulemaking and Guidance Procedures.” That order superseded DOT Order 2100.6A that was published in June 2021.

Review - Fall 2024 Unified Agenda – PHMSA HAZMAT

This is part of a continuing look at the Fall 2024 Unified Agenda that was published last week by the Biden Administration.

Fall 2024 Unified Agenda – DHS Rulemakings

Fall 2024 Unified Agenda – FAA and UAS

The DOT portion of the Unified Agenda lists 222 rulemakings for the Department. Of those, 28 rulemakings are associated with the DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). Hazardous Materials (HAZMAT) rules account for 15 of those rulemakings. There is one additional HAZMAT rulemaking listed in the DOT’s Long Range Actions portion of the Agenda.

Commentary

Trump’s nominee for DOT Secretary (still way too early for a PHMSA Administrator to be named), Sean Duffy (former congressman from Wisconsin), has some familiarity with the legislative and regulatory process, so I suspect that we will see DOT continue the rulemaking processes, especially those associated with updating regulatory requirements. People who work in government have a tendency to believe that the government has a duty to protect industry and/or the people; they would not be in government if that were not true.

The rules in the next four years will be more careful in their application of new costly mandates on industry. But, when necessary, regulators will be able to convince the political appointees to go along with necessary regulatory requirements.

 

For more information on these rulemakings, see my article at CFSN Detailed Analysis - https://patrickcoyle.substack.com/p/fall-2024-unified-agenda-e9f - subscription required.

DOT Publishes Civil Penalty Increase Rule – 2024

Today, the Department of Transportation published a direct final rule in the Federal Register (88 FR 89551-89568) on “Revisions to Civil Penalty Amounts, 2024”. This rule makes adjustments to the civil penalties that DOT and its modal agencies may levy for violations of various and sundry transportation regulations. These annual updates are required by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (PL 101-41). The adjustments were made using a multiplicative factor of 1.03241.

Agencies of potential interest here include:

Office of the Secretary,

FAA,

NHTSA,

FMCSA,

FRA, and

PHMSA

The effective date of the regulation is December 28^th, 2023. The preamble notes that:

“The Department emphasizes that this rule adjusts penalties prospectively, and therefore the penalty adjustments made by this rule will apply only to violations that take place after this rule becomes effective. This rule also does not change previously assessed or enforced penalties that DOT is actively collecting or has collected.”

Review – DOT Unified Agenda and UAS Regulations

In the DOT portion of the Spring 2022 Unified Agenda that was published earlier this week there are four rulemakings listed that will influence critical infrastructure’s ability to protect their facilities from attacks by unmanned aerial systems, two in the final rule stage of rulemaking and two lingering on the Long-Term Actions page.

FAA	Final Rule Stage	Registration and Marking Requirements for Small Unmanned Aircraft	2120-AK82
FAA	Final Rule Stage	External Marking Requirement for Small Unmanned Aircraft	2120-AL32
FAA	Long-Term Actions	Safe and Secure Operations of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems	2120-AL26
FAA	Long-Term Actions	Prohibit or Restrict the Operation of an Unmanned Aircraft in Close Proximity to a Fixed Site Facility	2120-AL33

Commentary

These four rulemakings, if fully implemented, would make it easier for critical infrastructure facilities to limit the legal use of unmanned aerial systems above and in the immediate vicinity of their facilities. Unfortunately, other restrictions in 18 USC would still prohibit facility management from doing more than notifying the authorities about illegal aerial activity over or around their facilities. US law still specifically prohibits (with some very limited exceptions for national defense) interfering with the operation of an aircraft (including UAS) in US airspace. Even intercepting the communications between the UAS operator and the drone technically run afoul of several statutes.

Congress has given DOJ and DHS strictly limited authority to intercept drones, but that authority does not generally extend to privately owned facilities. Congress needs to take a hard look at the need for protecting critical infrastructure facilities from attacks like the recent attack on a Russian refinery. While that strike was probably made by the Ukrainian military, similar attacks could be executed by terrorist organizations who have become increasingly sophisticated in drone operations.

For more details on these rulemakings, see my article on CFSN Detailed Analysis - https://patrickcoyle.substack.com/p/dot-unified-agenda-and-uas-regulations - subscription required.

DOT Publishes Transportation Supply Chain RFI – 9-16-21

Yesterday the DOT published a request for information in the Federal Register (86 FR 51719-51720) on “America's Supply Chains and the Transportation Industrial Base” in support of the President’s EO 14017, America's Supply Chains. In this RFI, DOT is soliciting practical solutions from a broad range of stakeholders to address current and future challenges to supply chain resilience in the freight and logistics sector. DOT is specifically asking for information related to cybersecurity risks.

The RFI solicits written comments on 13 different subject areas. One of those areas specifically includes cybersecurity:

“6. Technology issues, including information systems, cybersecurity risks, and interoperability, that affect the safe, efficient, and reliable movement of goods. Would greater standardization of those technologies help address those challenges?”

Written comments may be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal (www.regulations.gov; Docket Number DOT-OST-2021-0106). Comments should be submitted by October 18^th, 2021.

Public Comments on DOT Regulatory Review Notice

Yesterday the public comment period on the DOT Regulatory Review notice ended. Only 21 comments were submitted. It was a short comment period (30-days) because of requirements of one of the Executive Orders that the notice was supporting, that may explain the relatively low corporate turnout. What was amazing was that there were absolutely no letter writing campaigns associated with the Notice.

Comment Review

Of the 21 comments submitted there were only two addressing topics that I generally cover here in this blog. My comment on the FAA’s failure to write congressionally mandated regulations allowing critical infrastructure to request ‘no UAS fly zone’ designation and one cybersecurity comment from an anonymous commentor.

The cybersecurity related comment was part of a recommendation to do away with the Electronic Log Devices (ELDs) that FMCSA is requiring for truckers. Anonymous, quoting a number of cybersecurity publications, points out that the Omnitracs (a major ELD supplier) device has known cybersecurity vulnerabilities that might allow a sophisticated attacker to gain access to other systems on the trucks on which the ELD is installed. This, anonymous explains, makes the truck subject to cyber attack and potential hijacking. The commentor’s solution, get rid of the ELD’s.

Actually there are a couple of other commentors that also want to achieve the same end, but none of them mentioned cybersecurity as a reason.

What Is Missing

Given the level of opposition to the Trump Administration’s (PHMSA) rulemaking on LNG by rail, I expected to see a similar campaign supporting the Biden Administration’s consideration of revoking that rule. Biden specifically directed DOT to look at the LNG by rail rulemaking, it was mentioned in the Notice, and there were no comments submitted that addressed the issue.

One of the reasons may be that this is turning out to be a non-issue. Not because people are not concerned about the potential dangers, but because no one is taking advantage of the rule. The reason for that is the non-existence of the new DOT-113C120W9 required by the PHMSA rule. An article over at DelawareCurrents.org has an interesting discussion about why no one is making these new railcars.

I suspect that PHMSA will get around to removing the authorization for LNG shipment by rail. But it will be deliberatively done in such a way to make it more difficult to reinstitute such a rule in the future. There is no time pressure on DOT or PHMSA to get this accomplished, the lack of railcars has given them the time necessary to accomplish this.

DOT Publishes Regulatory Review Notice

Today DOT published a notice in the Federal Register (86 FR 23876-23877) that the Department was seeking public input on the regulatory review DOT is conducting in accordance with two Biden Administration executive orders; EO 13990 – “Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis”, and EO 13992 – “Revocation of Certain Executive Orders Concerning Federal Regulation”. DOT is inviting the public to provide input on existing rules and other agency actions for the Department's consideration regarding consistency with the policies and objectives of these executive orders.

The notice discusses the presidential directives from EO 13990 and EO 13992. It also mentions the specific directive from the President for DOT to review the Liquified Natural Gas by Rail rulemaking finalized last summer.

In requesting these public comments, DOT is looking for specific information about each recommendation. The items of interest listed below are not intended to limit target of recommendations, but rather to ensure that the recommendations will provide actionable items for consideration.

• Specific reference to regulation or agency action,

• Description of the effects of the identified regulation or agency action,

• Description of potential alternative action, and

• Examples of the affected entities or projects.

Comments may be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal (www.Regulations.gov; Docket number DOT-OST-2021-0036). Comments should be submitted by June 4^th, 2021.

FAA Sends Two Drone Final Rules to OMB

Yesterday the OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) announced that it had received two final rules from the DOT’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for review. Both rulemakings address unmanned aircraft operations. The rulemakings address remote identification of drones and operations over people.

Remote Identification

The first rulemaking concerns “Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems”. The notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this rule was published in December of last year. According to the Spring 2020 Unified Agenda listing for this action:

“This action would require the remote identification of unmanned aircraft systems. The remote identification of unmanned aircraft systems in the airspace of the United States would address safety, national security, and law enforcement concerns regarding the further integration of these aircraft into the airspace of the United States while also enabling greater operational capabilities.”

Operating Over People

The second rulemaking concerns “Operations of Small Unmanned Aircraft Over People”. The NPRM for this rule was published in February of 2019. . According to the Spring 2020 Unified Agenda listing for this action:

“This rulemaking would address the performance-based standards and means-of-compliance for operation of small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) over people not directly participating in the operation or not under a covered structure or inside a stationary vehicle that can provide reasonable protection from a falling small unmanned aircraft. This rule would provide relief from certain operational restrictions implemented in the Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems final rule (RIN 2120-AJ60).”

Two Transportation Reg Rollback Initiative Published Today

Today DHS and DOT published separate notices in the Federal Register (82 FR 26632-26634, and 82 FR 26734-26735) requesting public feedback on potential rules and regulations that should be reviewed for potential elimination under President Trumps regulatory rollback initiative (EO 13777). The DHS initiative addresses Coast Guard regulations, guidance documents, and interpretative documents that could be repealed, replaced, or modified. The DOT effort is a Department-wide look at existing policy statements, guidance documents, and regulations to identify unnecessary obstacles to transportation infrastructure projects.

Coast Guard

DHS is looking for input on Coast Guard regulations that:

• Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job creation;

• Are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective;

• Impose costs that exceed benefits;

• Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with regulatory reform initiatives and policies;

• Are inconsistent with the requirements of section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note), or the guidance issued pursuant to that provision, in particular those regulations that rely in whole or in part on data, information, or methods that are not publicly available or that are insufficiently transparent to meet the standard of reproducibility; or

• Derive from or implement Executive Orders or other Presidential directives that have been subsequently rescinded or substantially modified.

Specifically, DHS is looking to review regulations found in:

• 33 CFR Chapter I;

• 46 CFR Chapter I;

• 46 CFR Chapter III; and

• 49 CFR Chapter IV

They are also planning on looking at guidance documents and information collection requests.

DHS is soliciting public comments. Comments may be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal (www.Regulations.gov; Docket # USCG-2017-0480). Comments should be submitted by July 10^th, 2017.

DOT

The DOT initiative published today takes a slightly different tact. They are specifically trying to identify regulations, guidance documents and policies that unjustifiably delay or prevent completion of surface, maritime, and aviation transportation infrastructure projects. They want information that identifies:

• A specific reference;

• A description of the burden;

• A description of less burdensome alternatives; and

• Examples of affected projects

DOT is soliciting public comments. Comments may be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal (www.Regulations.gov; Docket # OST-2017-0057). Comments should be submitted by July 24^th, 2017.

Commentary

Regardless of how you might feel about the current administration, it is almost certainly a good idea to periodically review the current regulatory environment to ensure that outdated, outmoded or even ineffective regulations are modified or removed. There are statutory processes in place for internal departmental reviews, but no government employee is going to be able to identify or even understand all of those regulations that cause unnecessary pain and economic hardships in the regulated community.

Having said that, it should be remembered that no executive branch department can change regulatory requirements specifically mandated by Congress. Those will require legislative changes, something that can only be suggested by the Administration. This is briefly addressed in the DOT project.

Spring 2016 Unified Agenda – DOT

As I mentioned yesterday the OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) published the Spring 2016 Unified Agenda. Today I want to look at the Unified Agenda for the Department of Transportation. I do not follow this portion of the Unified Agenda as closely as I do the DHS portion; mainly because DOT is a much more prolific writer of regulations than is DHS.

The Current Agenda

The table below lists the DOT rulemakings on the current agenda that I find interesting. This is a smaller set of interest than I normally follow here in this blog, but I do have some space and reader interest limitations that I need to take into consideration.

FAA	Proposed Rule Stage	Operations of Small Unmanned Aircraft Over People	2120-AK85
FAA	Final Rule Stage	Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems	2120-AJ60
FAA	Final Rule Stage	Registration and Marking Requirements for Small Unmanned Aircraft	2120-AK82
NHTSA	Proposed Rule Stage	Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard FMVSS 150 -- Vehicle to Vehicle (V2V) Communication	2127-AL55
PHMSA	Proposed Rule Stage	Hazardous Materials: Review and Update of Rail Carrier Regulations in Part 174 RRR	2137-AF07
PHMSA	Proposed Rule Stage	Hazardous Materials: Oil Spill Response Plans and Information Sharing for High-Hazard Flammable Trains	2137-AF08
PHMSA	Proposed Rule Stage	Hazardous Materials: Real-Time Emergency Response Information by Rail	2137-AF21
PHMSA	Final Rule Stage	Hazardous Materials: FAST Act Requirements for Flammable Liquids and Rail Tank Cars	2137-AF17

The FAA

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has 38 rulemakings listed in this version of the Unified Agenda. Unfortunately, none of those seems to address cybersecurity issues. While the FAA, aircraft manufacturers, and airlines are beginning to look at the potential risk from these issues, it does not appear that we are anywhere near regulatory considerations at this point.

I have selected three unmanned aerial system (UAS) rulemakings to include in my table. The first deals with flying small UAS over people and its abstract includes an interesting sentence; “This rulemaking would provide relief from certain operational restrictions implemented in the Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems final rule.” That rule prohibited the flying of small UAS over people.

The second rulemaking deals with the regulation of the operation of commercial small UAS. Since this rulemaking is supposed to look at registration and marking of small UAS, I included the third rulemaking which already addressed those issues in an interim final rule. The FAA still intends to issue a final rule on this topic.

NHTSA

The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) has 25 rulemakings on the Unified Agenda. Only one of those may be of specific interest to readers of this blog, the vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) rulemaking. That is because of the cybersecurity provisions that may be included in the rulemaking. I addressed these in my blog post on the ANPRM back in 2014; yes, NHTSA moves as fast as the rest of DOT in their rulemaking process.

PHMSA

The Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) also has 25 rulemakings listed on the Unified Agenda. I selected four of those that deal, at least tangentially, with crude oil transportation by rail.

The first is a somewhat cooperative venture between PHMSA and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). This rulemaking would address results of an FRA study that identified “several trends in industry practices and operating procedures that present new and different risks to safety”. Addressing those risks and just generally updating the regulations regarding the handling of hazardous materials via rail should make for an interesting rulemaking.

The rail oil spill response plan rulemaking is high on the Congressional wish list and they have been applying pressure on PHMSA to complete this rulemaking. As would be expected, similar pressure is being exerted by a variety of environmental and safety activist organizations. Unfortunately, those two pressure points are pushing towards entirely different outcomes in the regulatory schema so I expect that we will see continued delays on this rulemaking.

The third PHMSA rulemaking was dictated by Congress in §7302 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act passed last December. It would require the creation of electronic train consists that include the identification of hazardous materials and emergency response information for those materials. Class 1 railroads are already developing/deploying this technology so PHMSA is behind the regulatory power curve.

The last rulemaking was also specified by the FAST Act in sections 7304, 7305, and 7306. In this case Congress was much more specific about what the rule should entail so PHMSA is going with a direct final rule without the publish and comment process to speed up their response to the Congressional requirement. Congress mandated that the final rule be published by May 16^th, 2016, so PHMSA is already late on this rulemaking; no surprise here.

Long-Term Actions

While the DOT Unified Agenda is lengthy, they keep (with the exception of NHTSA) relatively few items on their long-term actions list. Only two items on their list made it to my list of interst:

OST	Protection of Sensitive Security Information	2105-AD59
FRA	Track Safety Standards; Improving Rail Integrity	2130-AC53

The first is included because both DHS and DOT have responsibility for protecting SSI and both have this on their long-term action list. Of course their continued inaction will mean that the SSI program will be more impacted by the National Archives and Records Administration rulemaking on sensitive but unclassified information that is in OIRA review.

At first glance I was severely disappointed to see this new rulemaking listed on the long-term actions page, but after a closer look I am just as confused as I am disappointed. Anyone that has followed the crude oil train issue in any detail will know that a large number of the crude oil train derailments that we have seen have been due, at least in part, by rail integrity issues. This rulemaking should be a priority for the FRA.

What makes me confused is that looking at the rulemaking page it shows that FRA intends to have a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) ‘scheduled’ for June 2016. While I never believe projected dates in the Unified Agenda, that would indicate a fairly short-term long-term action. Oh well.

DOT and Canadian Transport Ministry Announce New HHFT Final Rule

At a press conference this morning the Secretary of Transportation and the Canadian Minister of Transportation announced the issuing of the new DOT highly-hazardous flammable train regulations (HM-251). A copy of the final rule (.PDF Download) was signed today by Secretary Foxx and it should be published in the Federal Register sometime next week. It should be noted that the OMB’s OIRA has still not ‘approved’ the HHFT rule.

According to a summary document (.PDF Download) provided by the DOT press release issued today the rule addresses the following areas:

∙ Enhanced Braking;

∙ Enhanced Standards for New and Existing Tank Cars Used in HHFTs;

∙ Reduced Operating Speeds;

∙ More Accurate Classification of Unrefined Petroleum-Based Products;

∙ Rail routing - Risk Assessment; and

∙ Rail routing – Notification

For the public, the most controversial portion of this rule will be those dealing with the changing railcar standards and the associate phase out dates. The summary document explains those this way:

∙ New tank cars constructed after October 1, 2015 are required to meet enhanced DOT Specification 117 design or performance criteria for use in an HHFT.

∙ Existing tank cars must be retrofitted in accordance with the DOT-prescribed retrofit design or performance standard for use in an HHFT.

∙ Retrofits must be completed based on a prescriptive retrofit schedule. The retrofit timeline focuses on two risk factors, the packing group and differing types of DOT-111 and CPC-1232 tank car.

∙ A retrofit reporting requirement is triggered if consignees owning or leasing tank cars covered under this rulemaking do not meet the initial retrofit milestone.

I will be doing a more detailed look at the specific provisions of this draft of the final rule in future blog posts.

Congressional Hearings – Week of 3-30-13

Both the House and Senate will be in session this week. Budget and spending matters continue to dominate the hearing schedule, but only one of those will be of specific interest to readers of this blog. There is also a hearing this week on the reauthorization of the Hazardous Materials Regulations.

Budget

The table below shows the hearing status of the various agencies of specific interest to readers of this blog and when the hearing have been / will be held on the President’s budget request for them.

Agency	House Approp.	House Oversight	Senate Approp.	Senate Oversight
DHS	3-11-14	3-13-14	3-11-14	3-13-14
DOT	3-12-14	3-12-14	3-13-14
Defense	3-13-14	3-6-14	NA	NA
CG	3-12-14	3-26-14
FEMA	3-26-14	3-25-14		3-13-14
TSA	3-25-14

The hearing I mentioned above does not fit on this table because it isn’t specifically about the President’s budget. It is related to transportation safety so I’ll discuss it below. Please note that I’ve added ‘NA’ to the Senate side of the hearing table for ‘Defense’; they break out the hearings for defense spending into much smaller pieces so there is no single date that would fit into this block. In the unlikely event that they do a specific cybersecurity defense hearing I’ll replace the NA with that date.

Transportation Safety

The Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials Subcommittee of the Senate Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will be holding a hearing looking at “Examining Issues for Hazardous Materials Reauthorization” on Wednesday. By definition chemical transportation safety will be the topic for this hearing.

The witness list includes:

• Cynthia Quarterman, PHMSA;

• William F. Downey, American Trucking Association;

• Thomas E. Schick, American Chemistry Council;

• Stephen Pelkey, American Pyrotechnics Association; and

• Kevin O'Connor, International Association of Fire Fighters

With the absence of any railroad or petroleum industry witnesses I don’t suspect that the crude oil classification issue will get much discussion, though it will probably be mentioned.

The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee will be holding an oversight hearing looking at the DOT Modes (FAA, FHA, FRA, FTA, PHMSA, FMCSA and MA). Witnesses will include representatives from each of these agencies.

Chemical Transportation Safety will be one of the topics that will come up with a possible mention of the crude oil train safety issue.

House Floor

The Majority Leader’s web site shows mainly political posturing bills being considered by the House this week, as I would expect to see through the first Tuesday in November. Tuesday will be the day of bipartisanship this week with a number of bills being considered under suspension of the rules. The only bill of specific interest here will be HR 4005, the Coast Guard Authorization bill that I discussed in an earlier post.

Fall 2010 Regulatory Agenda

Today the Obama Administration published their Fall 2010 Regulatory Agenda in the Federal Register. Each Department in the Executive Branch published a summary of all current and projected rulemakings, existing regulations, and completed actions for their agency. A separate listing for the Regulatory Information Service Center provided a more detailed regulatory plan listing specific rules currently in the regulatory development process.

Regulatory Agendas of potential interest to the chemical security community include:

• Department of Homeland Security
• Department of Transportation

DHS Regulatory Plan

The following regulations in the DHS portion of the RISC regulatory plan (75 FR 79536-79571) may be of specific interest to the chemical security community

• Secure Handling of Ammonium Nitrate Program – 75 FR 79542
• Updates to Maritime Security – 75 FR 79554
• Importer Security Filing and Additional Carrier Requirements – 75 FR 79556
• Large Aircraft Security Program, Other Aircraft Operator Security Program, and Airport Operator Security Program – 75 FR 96561
• Freight Railroads—Security Training of Employees – 75 FR 79563
• Air Cargo Screening – 75 FR 79567

DOT Regulatory Plan

The following regulations in the DOT portion of the RSIC regulatory plan (75 FR 79606-79626) may be of specific interest to the chemical security community

• Hazardous Materials: Limiting the Use of Mobile Telephones by Highway – 75 FR 79624
• Hazardous Materials: Limiting the Use of Electronic Devices by Highway – 75 FR 79625

I plan on looking as some of the specific rule makings in future blog postings.

2009 Fall Regulatory Agenda

Twice each year, in the spring and fall, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), each Cabinet Department, and independent agency of the Federal Government publish an update of the Unified Agenda and Regulatory Plan in the Federal Register. The OMB publishes an overview of the entire government’s agenda and each department/agency separately list their agenda and plan. In today’s Federal Register that process has started. The OMB’s lengthy overview in today’s Federal Register provides a description of how the Obama Administration views regulatory affairs and a partial list of regulatory actions planned or underway for the next six months. It also includes a brief statement of the regulatory priorities of each of the reporting segments of the US Government. The DHS ‘statement’ from OMB can be found at 74 FR 64213. The DOT ‘statement’ can be found at 74 FR 64283. There is a separate report on the DHS regulatory agenda filed by DHS. DOT also has their separate report. A more complete list regulations; considered, proposed and final, is included in the Regulatory Agenda that can be found at www.RegInfo.gov. Chemical Security on the Agenda I have only been able to briefly review the today’s documents, but one thing stands out; there is very little mention of chemical security issues in the Federal Register entries for OMB and DHS. The separate DHS entry lists no chemical security related regulations that might have a “significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities”. In fact it only lists a total of 18 rules that might have such impact. The OMB lists a total of 30 DHS rules without explaining why they made the cut. There are two rules that affect the chemical security community; both are old requirements that are long overdue. I reported on both of these rules in my blog about the Spring 2009 Regulatory Agenda The first is the ammonium nitrate security rule (RIN 1601-AA52). The NPRM was required to be published in May of 2008. According to www.RegInfo.gov the current plan is to publish the NPRM in April of next year. The second chemical security related rule that makes it into the OMB’s list of DHS rules deals with security training for freight railroad employees (RIN 1652–AA57). The requirement for this rule dates back to February of 2008. Once again www.RegInfo.gov says that TSA intends to publish the NPRM in April. There is a much larger list of DHS pending rules listed on the www.RegInfo.gov website; ten pages worth when the list is transferred to a Word® file. There will be more data and analysis to follow after I have a chance to read the documents in detail.