October 2007

From the editors of CCH's Transportation products, here are summaries of the important recent developments in the area for the past month.  Complete coverage of these issues, and many more, appear in our print and electronic products, including: Aviation Law Reporter, Commercial Aircraft Transactions, Issues in Aviation Law and Policy, Federal Carriers Reporter, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Decisions, and Motor Carrier Liability.

If you have comments or suggestions concerning the information provided or the format used, please feel free to contact me directly at aaron.broaddus@wolterskluwer.com.

Hot Topics

Selection of Sturgell for Top FAA Job Draws Mixed Reaction
Supporters and opponents are reacting to the October 23 White House announcement that President Bush intends to nominate Robert A. Sturgell, currently acting Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, to take over permanently as FAA Administrator for a five-year term. If confirmed by the U.S. Senate, Sturgell would succeed Marion C. Blakey, who left the top FAA job upon completing her term in September. Sturgell “has worked tirelessly to modernize our nation's air traffic control system,” according to White House Press Secretary Dana Perino, who added that the acting Administrator has over three decades of “real-world experience” in the field. Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters endorsed Sturgell and urged the Senate to quickly confirm him. Air Transport Association President James C. May called Sturgell a “highly respected leader of the aviation community. His distinguished and varied background, in both civil and military matters, uniquely equip him to serve as FAA Administrator.” However, National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) President Patrick Forrey openly opposes Sturgell's nomination. Forrey said his organization's opposition is based on the aviation system's record delays and degradation of safety margins, combined with the largest decline in the number of experienced air traffic controllers since 1981. Aviation Law Report Letter No. 1366, October 31, 2007.

STB Failing to Meet Responsibilities, Oberstar Says
The Surface Transportation Board (STB) is not effectively meeting its responsibilities and must make further efforts to improve its rate relief processes and address competition and captivity concerns, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James L. Oberstar (D-Minn.) said September 25. Oberstar and ranking member Richard H. Baker (R-La.) have introduced H.R. 2125, the Rail Competition and Service Improvement Act, which they say will inject more competition into the rail industry.

At a committee hearing, members heard from Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) who urged them to reform the railroads' pricing and regulatory system. Dorgan noted that ``captive shippers,'' primarily in rural areas, are being over-charged by billions of dollars, while the STB is practically ``dead from the neck up.'' Dorgan has introduced legislation that would put in place a new, workable rate challenge process for captive shippers who are being overcharged. It would also empower the STB to proactively suspend and investigate unreasonable rail charges and service levels, rather than wait for a complaint to be filed. The current system is ``stacked against the shipper from the start,'' Dorgan said, adding that many shippers no longer even bother to file a complaint because a ruling in favor of the railroads is so certain.

STB Chairman Charles D. Nottingham said the Board recently has improved its procedures for handling rate cases. Before these changes, the majority of captive rail traffic had effectively been blocked from the Board's rate review due to the complexity and cost of the procedure, Nottingham said. The new procedures ensure that the rate review process will be accessible to all captive traffic that moves under common carrier rates, he said.

JayEtta Z. Hecker of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) told the committee that, while the STB has taken a number of ``promising'' steps recently to revise its rate relief process, it is too soon to say what effect these steps will have. Glenn English, Chief Executive Officer of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, said that ``at virtually every opportunity the STB shows bias toward the railroad industry and recent actions suggest that without major reform shippers, and ultimately consumers, will continue to be at the mercy of a railroad industry that we believe threatens the very health of our economy.'' Meanwhile, Union Pacific Chairman Jim Young told members that any legislation or regulatory action that would result in railroads being unable to invest ``would be particularly bad at this time, when the nation needs railroads to expand.'' Federal Carriers Report Letter No. 1519, October 12, 2007.

Aviation News

Comment Period Extended for “Secure Flight” Proposal
In response to requests from the Air Transportation Association of America (ATA) and the International Air Transport Association (IATA), the Transportation Security Administration has extended by 30 days the comment period for its proposed rulemaking regarding the “Secure Flight” passenger prescreening program. Originally scheduled to end on October 22, 2007, the comment period will continue through November 21, 2007. Under the proposal, TSA would assume direct control of Secure Flight, in which the names of domestic airline passengers are checked against a terrorist watch list. Currently, air carriers are responsible for the name checks (see CCH Aviation Law Reports No. 1362, August 30, 2007). Aviation Law Report Letter No. 1366, October 31, 2007.

U.S., EU at Odds Over Aviation Emissions
The U.S. airline industry is deeply disappointed by the European Union's indication that it will unilaterally impose emissions trading or environmental charges on other countries' airlines, contrary to international law. According to Air Transport Association (ATA) President James C. May, if the EU persists in this direction, “there will no doubt be a legal battle.” Following the conclusion of the International Civil Aviation Organization's (ICAO) 36th Assembly, which ended September 28, Luis Fonseca de Almeida, Portugal's Director General of Civil Aviation, said the EU strongly believes “it would be best if the international community could reach an effective mechanism on tackling aviation emissions.” He added that the EU was disappointed by the fact that the ICAO talks concluded without a clear agreement on a way forward to reduce greenhouse gases from international aviation. Aviation Law Report Letter No. 1365, October 12, 2007.

Proposal Would Equip Aircraft for Satellite Navigation by 2020
The Federal Aviation Administration has proposed an initial set of aircraft avionics requirements that would enable the transition of air traffic control to the satellite-based “NextGen” system by the year 2020. Under the proposal, satellite-based avionics would be required on all aircraft flying in the nation's busiest airspace by 2020, enabling air traffic controllers to track aircraft by satellites using Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B), which is ten times more accurate than current radar technology. According to FAA, the tenfold increase in the accuracy of satellite signals may eventually allow air traffic controllers to reduce separation standards between aircraft, significantly increasing the number of aircraft that can be safely managed in the nation's skies. Traffic is projected to grow from 740 million passengers last year to one billion in 2015, and will be double the current levels by 2025. Under a contract awarded to ITT Corporation last month, ground stations for the new system will be brought online across the country, starting with the East Coast, portions of the Midwest, Alaska, and the Gulf of Mexico (see CCH Aviation Law Reports No. 1363, September 13, 2007). Nationwide coverage is expected by 2013. Aviation Law Report Letter No. 1365, October 12, 2007.

U.S. Not Liable for Contract Controller's Negligence
Wrongful death actions against the federal government stemming from the alleged negligence of an air traffic controller employed by a private firm under contract to the federal government were barred by the “independent contractor” exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act, a federal court in Illinois ruled. The controller's actions allegedly resulted in the midair collision of two small airplanes. According to the court, binding precedent required a determination that the firm was an independent contractor within the meaning of FTCA. Thus, while it was shown that the controller had been negligent and was a proximate cause of the plaintiffs' injuries, any negligence of the firm through its employees could not be the basis upon which to hold the federal government vicariously liable, the court said. Collins v. U.S. (NDIll) 32 Avi. 15,623.

Injured Passenger's State Claims Fail, Federal Claims Survive
State law claims by an airline passenger who was injured when struck by an object falling from an overhead storage bin were preempted by the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (FAA), a federal district court ruled. The passenger claimed that the carrier had negligently breached state law duties of care when it created, allowed, failed to inspect, failed to correct, failed to warn about, and failed to train its employees to identify or correct a dangerous and defective condition. However, the court held that the FAA completely preempts state and local standards in the field of aviation safety, precluding any claims based upon state law standards. Although an exception to preemption is contained the Act's savings clause, the clause references only state law remedies, not state law standards, the court said. Levy v. Continental Airlines, Inc. (EDPa) 32 Avi. 15,644.

Waybill Limited Carrier's Liability for Cargo Theft on Ground
An action for damages stemming from the theft of an international shipment from an air cargo carrier's agent during ground transportation to a Brazilian airport was limited by the terms of the carrier's air waybill, a federal appeals court ruled. The waybill contained a provision limiting the carrier's liability unless the shipper declared a higher value and paid a supplementary charge. The shipper, which had failed to declare a higher value for the goods, claimed that Brazilian law, by which a finding of gross negligence would defeat the liability limitation, applied to the action. However, using the governing federal common law choice-of-law analysis, the court ruled that the claim arose under federal common law because the U.S. had the greatest interest in the litigation. Although Brazil's interests in the contract and the parties was not insignificant, the interest of the U.S. in the determination of the action and the protection of the parties' justified expectations were determinative of U.S. venue. Concluding that the liability limitation was a valid part of the parties' contract, the court affirmed judgment for the carrier. Eli Lilly do Brasil, Ltda. v. Federal Express Corp. (2dCir) 32 Avi. 15,522.

Limited CVR Discovery Allowed in Flight 93 Damages Trial
In a damages trial stemming from the terrorist hijacking and crash of United Airlines flight 93 on September 11, 2001, a federal court ruled that the representative of one of the passengers was entitled to discovery of portions of the flight's cockpit voice recording. The plaintiff claimed that the recording was relevant to the damages available under the applicable state law because it contained probative evidence of pre-death pain, suffering, terror, and emotional distress of the passengers' apprehensions of certain death, both as to time period and intensity. The court noted that federal law allows discovery by a party of a cockpit recording if: (1) the parts of the recording transcript made public do not provide the party with sufficient information to receive a fair trial; and (2) discovery of the recording is necessary to provide the party with sufficient information to receive a fair trial. In re Sept. 11 Litig. (SDNY) 32 Avi. 15,533.

Forum Non Conveniens Allowed in Montreal Convention Action
In an action governed by the Montreal Convention stemming from the crash of a foreign airliner during an international flight, U.S. federal courts have discretion to consider the applicability of the doctrine of forum non conveniens, a federal court in Florida ruled. According to the court, the Convention's unambiguous and dispositive language expressly provides that questions of procedure are governed by the law of the forum. Thus, because the doctrine was firmly entrenched in U.S. procedural law by the time the Convention was drafted, the text, by implication, clearly permits the application of the doctrine in domestic litigation, the court reasoned. In addition, such a construction is consistent with the international law principle that the procedural rules of the forum state govern the implementation of a treaty in that state, absent a clear and express statement to the contrary, the court noted. Furthermore, the doctrine is consistent with the Convention's goal of a balance between passengers and air carriers by requiring that a court defer to a plaintiff's choice of forum in assessing whether one of the other fora would be more appropriate, the court added. In re W. Caribbean Airways, S.A. (SDFla) 32 Avi. 15,595.

Fee-Based Boarding Pass Service Enjoined
A federal district court in Texas has enjoined a firm that provided an air carrier's customers with access to desirable boarding passes in return for the payment of a fee from using the carrier's Internet website. The court noted that the website contained a notice stating that the use of the website constituted acceptance of the website's terms and conditions, one of which limited use to personal, non-commercial purposes. In addition, it was undisputed that the firm had actual knowledge of the terms at least from the time the carrier had sent a cease-and-desist letter informing the firm that the website's terms forbid its use for commercial purposes. As such, the firm's continued use of the website for commercial purposes had served to bind it to the contractual obligations imposed by the terms, according to the court. The firm, which argued that it had acted as the passengers' agent, nonetheless had breached the website's terms of use because those terms barred commercial use without regard to the user's status, the court reasoned. Southwest Airlines Co. v. BoardFirst, L.L.C. (NDTex) 32 Avi. 15,536.

Failure to Recognize On-Board Heart Attack Was an “Accident”
Evidence of an air carrier's alleged failure to recognize and/or respond to a passenger's heart attack during international transportation by air set forth a set of facts that would entitle the plaintiff to relief under the Montreal Convention, a federal court ruled. The passenger suffered a heart attack while in the aircraft's lavatory and was found dead by a cleaning crew after the flight had landed. The Convention imposes liability on an air carrier for a passenger's injury or death caused by an “accident” during an international flight. Under U.S. Supreme Court precedent interpreting the Convention, an “accident” is an unexpected or unusual event or happening that is external to the passenger, and not the passenger's own internal reaction to the usual, normal, and expected operation of the aircraft. Thus, while the passenger's heart attack had been caused by his own internal condition and was unrelated to the operation of the aircraft, the carrier's unusual or unexpected failure to recognize and/or respond to the heart attack, and its failure to conform to industry custom and practices by responding to the medical emergency, could, if proven, constitute a link in the chain of the events that caused the “accident,” triggering liability under the Convention, the court concluded. Watts v. American Airlines, Inc. (SDInd) 32 Avi. 15,667.

Airport Zoning Ordinance Resulted in Taking of Property
A federal appeals court has ruled that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution does not invalidate a Nevada Supreme Court decision finding that height restrictions in a county's airport zoning ordinance amounted to a taking of the underlying property requiring compensation under the state constitution. An owner of land adjacent to the airport had filed an inverse condemnation action, alleging that the zoning ordinance had effected a taking of the property. According to the federal panel, the state's supreme court is the final arbiter of the state constitution and it had applied independent and adequate state grounds to its takings analysis; thus, the decision was entitled to the federal court's deference. Vacation Village, Inc. v. Clark County (9thCir) 32 Avi. 15,585.

Surface Transportation News

Shipper Provided Opportunity to Choose Liability Coverage
A carrier had effectively limited its liability for a shipment of goods stolen during an interstate move, a federal district court ruled in an unpublished opinion. Prior to the shipment giving rise to this action, the carrier had transported approximately 670 loads for the shipper without incident. For each shipment, the shipper would prepare a bill of lading that the carrier's driver would sign and, after each delivery was completed, the carrier would forward a freight bill and a document referred to as a ``Pro Bill'' to the shipper. Each Pro Bill contained a liability limitation provision limiting the carrier's liability to a $10,000 maximum.

The action in this case arose following the theft of a shipment while in transit. The purchaser of the goods filed a claim with the shipper, which was paid by the shipper's insurer. The insurer, as the subrogee of the shipper, filed suit against the carrier seeking to recover damages in the amount of $650,000. The carrier challenged the claim, arguing that it should have been dismissed because the insurer could not prove that the goods had been delivered to the carrier in good condition. Additionally, the carrier filed a motion for summary judgment asserting that its liability was limited to $10,000 in accordance with the released value provision of its tariff and its bills of lading.

In response, the insurer argued that the liability limitation was ineffective because the shipper had not agreed to the liability limitation and had not been provided an opportunity to choose between different levels of liability. Based on the evidence, the court found that the circumstantial evidence presented by the insurer in support of its claim that the goods were delivered to the carrier in good condition was sufficient to support a prima facie Carmack claim. As for the liability limitation question, the court concluded that the carrier had effectively limited its liability. The shipper was deemed to have agreed to the liability limitation through its continued acceptance of the carrier's Pro Bill, which clearly set out the terms of the liability limitation. Further, the shipper was found to have been afforded an opportunity to choose between different levels of liability through the bills of lading that it had prepared, because they included a value declaration space that the shipper had left blank. Thus, the carrier's motion for summary judgment on the liability limitation issue was granted. Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. v. A.D. Transp. Express, Inc. (DNJ) CAR ¶84,511.

Preemption of State's Solid Waste Transfer Rules Vacated
A federal appellate court vacated and remanded for further consideration a decision by a federal district court finding that a state law aimed at regulating the transfer of solid waste to and from rail cars was preempted by the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA). A railroad that owned and operated five solid waste transfer stations within the State of New Jersey had challenged the state law under which a set of regulations had been adopted to govern the transfer of solid waste to and from rail cars. The railroad argued that the state law was preempted by the ICCTA. Under the ICCTA, a state law is preempted if it attempts to regulate transportation by a rail carrier and no exceptions to preemption are applicable.

The state argued that its law was not preempted because it was not intended to regulate transportation by rail carriers, but was adopted to protect the health and safety of its citizens. The district court sided with the carrier, holding that the state law could not escape preemption because the regulations were not generally applicable and non-discriminatory. The state appealed. Upon review, the appellate court held that, while the district court's reasoning was correct, its analysis was lacking because it failed to address each regulation individually. Thus, the district court's order permanently enjoining the state from enforcing the regulations was vacated and the decision was remanded for further consideration of whether each individual regulation was preempted by the ICCTA. N.Y. Susquehanna and W. Ry. Corp. v. Jackson (3rdCir) CAR ¶84,512.

Shipper's State Law Claims Preempted by Carmack
A shipper's cross-claims against a motor carrier based on breach of contract and failure to exercise due care were preempted by the Carmack Amendment, according to a federal district court. The shipper had hired the carrier to transport its household goods from California to Montana. During the move, some of the goods allegedly were lost or damaged. After discovering the damaged and missing goods, the shipper refused to pay the transportation charges. The carrier filed suit to recover the unpaid fees. The shipper filed a cross-complaint alleging state law claims for breach of contract and negligence.

The carrier argued for dismissal of the state law claims, asserting that they were preempted by the Carmack Amendment. Based on the evidence, it was determined that the shipper's cross-claims were directly related to the damage to her goods; therefore they were preempted by Carmack. Accordingly, the carrier's motion to dismiss was granted. United Van Lines LLC v. Edwards (EDCal) CAR ¶84,513.

Individual Must Be ``Disabled'' to Assert ADA Claim
A package delivery company's refusal to accommodate a driver who was unable to meet certain driver qualifications established by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration did not constitute discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a federal district court ruled. A package car driver who developed diabetes following an extended illness alleged that his employer had violated the ADA by denying him reasonable accommodations in order to allow him to return to work. The employer challenged the driver's claim, arguing that the ADA was not applicable because the driver was not a ``qualified individual with a disability'' as defined by the Act. The employee claimed that, even if he wasn't actually ``disabled'' because his condition did not limit a major life activity, the ADA was applicable because the employer regarded him as disabled.

In support of his claim, the employee relied on a letter sent by the employer stating that ``we are aware of no available position at UPS at this time for which you are qualified and capable of performing the essential job functions with or without reasonable accommodation.'' The employer asserted that it did not regard the driver as substantially limited in the major life activity of work but, rather, regarded him as unqualified for the particular position that he had held prior to his illness because he no longer met applicable DOT requirements for drivers of vehicles weighing more than 10,000 pounds. Federal regulations prohibit individuals who have diabetes mellitus from driving vehicles that weigh more than 10,000 pounds. The package car that the employee drove before he went on leave weighed more than 10,000 pounds, as did all of the company vehicles used for full-time commercial and residential routes. The employer subsequently offered the employee other available non-driving positions which the employee turned down. Based on the evidence submitted, the driver was not a ``qualified individual with a disability'' under the ADA. Thus, the employer had not discriminated against the driver in violation of the ADA. Campbell v. UPS (WDPenn) CAR ¶84,514.

Incomplete Feeder Line Application Properly Denied
The Surface Transportation Board (STB) affirmed a decision by the Director of the Office of Proceedings rejecting a feeder line application that did not contain all of the information required under the applicable regulations. The feeder line application sought to acquire, from BNSF Railway Company, a rail line running between Great Falls and Helena, Montana. The Director, who is responsible for the initial review of all feeder line applications, determined that the application was incomplete because it did not meet the regulatory requirements. The applicable regulations require that all feeder line applications must include: information sufficient to demonstrate that the applicant is a financially responsible person; estimates of the net liquidation value (NLV) and going concern value (GCV) of the line, and evidence to support the estimates; an operating plan that identifies the proposed operator, describes in detail the rail service to be provided, and demonstrates that adequate transportation would be provided for at least three years from the date of acquisition; and, if the application is based on public convenience and necessity criteria, evidence establishing that the criteria have been met.

Upon review, the STB determined that the Director had properly rejected the application based upon the fact that the applicant had failed to submit adequate evidence to demonstrate financial responsibility and had neglected to include in the application the name of the proposed operator of the line, a description of liability insurance, and the public convenience and necessity criteria. Thus, the application was properly denied. Dr. Daniel R. Fiehrer·Feeder Line Application·Line of BNSF Railway Company between Helena and Great Falls, MT (STB) CAR ¶37,247.

Railroad Ordered To Sell Rail Lines to One of Two Willing Buyers
The Surface Transportation Board authorized the sale of a rail line pursuant to the public convenience and necessity standards to one of two entities that had filed feeder line applications with the agency. Under the public convenience and necessity standard, a railroad can be compelled to sell a rail line if the line has been slated for abandonment or if the incumbent railroad has not adequately served the line, and a financially responsible person has applied to buy the line at a price not less than the constitutional minimum value. A rail line is eligible for sale under this standard if it is shown that: (1) the rail carrier operating the line refused to provide adequate service to shippers who transport traffic over the line; (2) the transportation over the line was inadequate for a majority of shippers using the line; (3) the sale of the line would not have a significant adverse financial impact on the rail carrier operating the line; (4) the sale of the line would not have an adverse effect on the overall operational performance of the rail carrier; and (5) the sale of the line would likely result in improved railroad transportation for shippers on the line. Based on the feeder line applications submitted by both potential buyers, the STB determined that the statutory requirements necessary to support the forced sale of rail lines had been met. Thus, the incumbent railroad was directed to sell the line to one of the two applicants for $2,350,918, subject to the terms prescribed by the STB. Pyco Indus., Inc.·Feeder Line Application·Lines of S. Plains Switching, Ltd. Co.; Keokuk Junction Ry. Co.·Feeder Line Application·Lines of S. Plains Switching, Ltd. Co. (STB) CAR ¶37,249.

DOT Modifies Time Zone Boundary in Southwest Indiana
The Department of Transportation (DOT) has opted to relocate the time zone boundary in southwest Indiana to move Knox, Daviess, Martin, Pike, and Dubois Counties from the Central Time Zone to the Eastern Time Zone. Under the Standard Time Act of 1918, as amended by the Uniform Time Act of 1966, the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to modify time zone boundaries within the United States. Any changes must be made with ``regard for the convenience of commerce and the existing junction points and division points of common carriers engaged in interstate and foreign commerce.'' Based on the petition initiating the rulemaking and in consideration of comments submitted and testimony received, DOT found good cause to amend the time zone boundary between the Eastern and Central Time zones in Knox, Daviess, Martin, Pike, and Dubois Counties. The change will take effect at 2:00 a.m. CDT on November 4, 2007. A related request to move Perry County to the Eastern time zone was denied after DOT determined that the petition failed to provide sufficient information to justify the change under the statutory standard. For further information, contact: Judith Kaleta, Office of the General Counsel, telephone: (202) 493-0992. 72 FR 54367, September 25, 2007.

Final Rule Dealing with the Use of International Standards Revised
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) has issued corrections to a rulemaking that revised and consolidated the requirements of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) applicable to the use of international standards. The affected international standards include the International Civil Aviation Organization's Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO Technical Instructions), the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code), the Canadian Transport of Dangerous Goods Regulations (TDG Regulations), and the International Atomic Energy Agency Safety Standards Series: Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Materials (IAEA regulations). As a result of an appeal filed by the Dangerous Goods Advisory Council (DGAC), PHMSA issued a final rule correcting certain regulatory provisions in order to address errors contained in the original rulemaking. The corrections include the reinstatement of a phrase that had been inadvertently dropped from the final rule, along with a minor editorial change resulting from the incorrect use of the term ``subpart'' in the reference to a regulatory provision. The revised regulations took effect September 28, 2007. For further information, contact: Joan McIntyre or Kurt Eichenlaub, telephone: (202) 366-8553. 72 FR 55090, September 28, 2007.

Oxygen Transport Rules Amended-Effective Date Delayed
In response to appeals filed by various interested parties, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) has issued a final rule delaying the effective date and amending certain requirements adopted in a final rule published on January 31, 2007. The original rulemaking amended the Hazardous Materials Regulations governing the packaging of compressed oxygen and chemical oxygen generators for transport by aircraft and was intended to take effect October 1, 2007. The current rulemaking amends certain provisions adopted in the original rulemaking to clarify the thermal resistance test methods for packagings for oxygen cylinders and oxygen generators, and to include DOT specification 3E and 39 cylinders among the types of cylinders authorized for the transportation of compressed oxygen and other oxidizing gases aboard aircraft. Other modifications include the development of a marking option to ensure easier identification of cylinders equipped with the new pressure relief device and outer packaging meeting the flame penetration and thermal resistance requirements. As a result of this latest action, the new effective date for both rulemakings is October 1, 2008, with voluntary compliance authorized as of October 29, 2007. For further information contact: John Gale or T. Glenn Foster, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, telephone: (202) 366-8553; or David Catey, Office of Flight Standards Service, telephone: (202) 267-3732. 72 FR 55091, September 28, 2007.

PHMSA Revises Hazmat Rules to Enhance Clarity and Accuracy
The annual review of the Hazardous Materials Regulations by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration has resulted in the publication of a final rule aimed at enhancing the understanding and accuracy of the regulations. The amendments adopted by the agency make minor regulatory changes, correct inconsistencies in terminology as well as typographical and printing errors, and increase the clarity of the regulations. Additionally, the rulemaking revises references to the agency address to indicate the new location for the headquarters office. The rulemaking is intended to improve the accuracy and reduce misunderstandings of the regulations. The adopted changes are minor and do not impose new requirements. As such, the agency determined that a notice and comment period was unnecessary. The amendments were effective October 1, 2007. For further information, contact: Dirk Der Kinderen, telephone: (202) 366-8553. 72 FR 55678, October 1, 2007.

TWIC Program Clarified and Expanded; Final Fees Set
The Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Security Administration has released a final rule amending certain provisions of the Transportation Workers Identification Credential (TWIC) program. The adopted amendments allow for greater participation in the TWIC program and codify the fees required to obtain a TWIC. The revised regulations expand the scope of the program to include additional non-resident aliens, clarify who may be eligible for a TWIC at a reduced fee, increase the credential replacement fee from $36 to $60, and codify the final program fees. The final rule took effect September 28, 2007. For further information, contact: Christine Beyer, telephone: (571) 227-2657. 72 FR 55043, September 28, 2007.