MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Treatment of Data Influenced By Exceptional and Natural Events FROM: The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Air Management Michael Geigert, Air Pollution Control Engineer August 31, 2005 TO: Larry Wallace ( EPA)

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the " Staff Work Paper on the Use of Air Quality Data Related to Exceptional and Natural Events for the Particulate Matter Standards" ( Updated August 11, 2005, US EPA OAR, OAQPS). As you already know, the different parts of the Country will have differing needs with regard to the flagging of such data. Within recent memory, Connecticut, as well as several other nearby States had successfully flagged the PM2.5 data during a 2002 wildfire event in Quebec, Canada. The guidance in place at the time ( The 1996 PM10 Natural Events Policy) worked well, and this current draft guidance appears to be a natural extension of that policy.

Unlike some of the western States, Connecticut is not likely to be as frequently impacted by socalled natural or exceptional events. Although Connecticut may occasionally be impacted by regional wildfires, the case of the Quebec wildfires was indeed exceptional: smoke from numerous fires in the Quebec wilderness was driven due south by an unusually strong high pressure in July, and even affected States as far south as Virginia. We feel that your draft guidance adequately addresses this type of situation, especially section 6.11, which addresses transport from international sources.

Another area of concern for Connecticut would be the flagging of emissions caused by fireworks or other celebratory events. This was addressed in section 7.3 ( Infrequent Large Gatherings), but should be further elaborated with regards to the fireworks. We have definitely noticed elevated PM2.5 levels during some Fourth of July fireworks displays, but none have exceeded the current 24 hour PM2.5 standard. With the expectance of the 24 hour PM2.5 standards being revised downward, there is a possibility that an exceedance may occur during certain conditions. As currently written into this section, prior to an event: " all reasonable available control measures must be used and documented." More specific guidance for this type of event would be helpful as Connecticut has not regulated emissions from these events in the past.

Another section of concern for Connecticut is Section 5.1: The guidance proposes that air quality agencies submit detailed, compelling documentation to justify the flagging in AQS of high concentration PM samples that are linked to exceptional or natural events within 60 days of the end of the calendar quarter in which the event occurred. In accordance with 40CFR section 58.35, the agency deadline for submittal of validated data to AQS is 90 days after the end of a calendar quarter. For the PM manual methods, analytical laboratory sample turnaround times, manual entering of field and laboratory data sheets into computer databases and the required review and validation process would likely preclude an agency's evaluation of the ambient sample data significantly earlier than the 90 day deadline. If the proposed guidance were accepted, data inaccessibility in the 60 days following the quarter could also cause an agency to miss the deadline for filing for an extension, depending on whether there was prior awareness of probable high concentrations or the potential for a cause and effect relationship between a natural event and ambient concentration data.

In addition to data access issues, an adequate time allowance must be made for the agency to perform studies ( data analyses, modeling), complete the technical document, and secure management approval. Given the potential time needed for reviewing the data and submitting the request, the State recommends that agency requests for exceptional or natural event flags and submission of supporting documentation be required no less than 90 days following the end of the quarter in which the event occurred, and that the agency may submit a request for a 30 day extension for the exceptional/ natural event submission within the 90 days following the end of the quarter.

The other issues that you requested comment on: The level of documentation that should be required to substantiate an exceptional or natural event claim and the flagging of data below the standard that may affect the annual average for an area are difficult to quantify and should be negotiated on a case by case basis. Regarding whether should there be a bright line test associated with high wind events, Connecticut is rarely impacted by high wind events that would raise PM2.5 levels and so has no comment on this.

Best Regards,

Michael Geigert Cc: Amy Royden Bloom


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 88 (Friday, May 6, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27035-27037]
[FR Doc No: 2022-09420]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0507; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01372-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, Support and Services (Formerly
Known as Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Saab AB, Support and Services Model 340A (SAAB/SF340A) and
SAAB 340B airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report that
there is no evidence that post-machining stress relief or de-
embrittlement post-cadmium plating treatments were performed on certain
torque arm center pins. This proposed AD would require replacing each
affected torque arm center pin on the main landing gear (MLG), as
specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which
is proposed for incorporation by reference. This proposed AD would also
prohibit the installation of affected parts. The FAA is proposing this
AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 21,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For material that will be incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this material on the EASA website at
https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2022-0507.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0507; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace
Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0507; Project Identifier
MCAI-2021-01372-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing

date and may amend this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA,
International Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA
98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]. Any
commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated
as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0273, dated December 8, 2021
(EASA AD 2021-0273) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain Saab AB, Support and Services Model 340A
(SAAB/SF340A) and SAAB 340B airplanes.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a report that there is no evidence
that post-machining stress relief or de-embrittlement post-cadmium
plating was performed on affected torque arm center pins. Affected
torque arm center pins are pins with part number (P/N) AIR134762 and
batch number 17138, 21098, or 22863. Absence of the treatments could
degrade the mechanical characteristics of the pins. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address untreated torque arm center pins installed
on any MLG, which, if not corrected, could lead to failure of the
torque arm center pin and free swinging of the MLG, possibly resulting
in loss of control of the airplane on ground, or loss of the MLG
hydraulic braking function. See the MCAI for additional background
information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0273 specifies procedures for replacing each affected
torque arm center pin on the MLG. EASA AD 2021-0273 also prohibits the
installation of affected parts. This material is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that
the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop
in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2021-0273 described previously. This proposed AD would also
prohibit the installation of affected parts.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to incorporate EASA AD 2021-0273 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with
EASA AD 2021-0273 in its entirety through that incorporation, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading
of a particular section in EASA AD 2021-0273 does not mean that
operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2021-
0273. Service information required by EASA AD 2021-0273 for compliance
will be available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0507 after the FAA final rule is
published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 43 airplanes
of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product        operators *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 work-hours x $85 per hour = $680...........................          $2,839           $3,519         $151,317
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this proposed AD may be covered under warranty,
  thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. The FAA does not control warranty coverage for
  affected individuals. As a result, the FAA has included all known costs in the cost estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

Saab AB, Support and Services (Formerly Known as Saab AB, Saab
Aeronautics): Docket No. FAA-2022-0507; Project Identifier MCAI-
2021-01372-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by June 21, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Saab AB, Support and Services Model 340A
(SAAB/SF340A) and SAAB 340B airplanes, certificated in any category,
as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2021-0273, dated December 8, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0273).

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing
gear.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that there is no evidence that
post-machining stress relief or de-embrittlement post-cadmium
plating treatments were performed on certain torque arm center pins.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address untreated torque arm center
pins installed on any main landing gear (MLG), which, if not
corrected, could lead to failure of the torque arm center pin and
free swinging of the MLG, possibly resulting in loss of control of
the airplane on ground, or loss of the MLG hydraulic braking
function.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2021-0273.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0273

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0273 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2021-0273 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(2) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Saab AB,
Support and Services' EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2021-0273, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may
view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. This material may be found in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2022-0507.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Shahram
Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA,
International Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

    Issued on April 22, 2022.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-09420 Filed 5-5-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 15, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 198)]
[Notices]
[Page 58359-58360]
[DOCID:fr15oc07-85]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-99-5578, FMCSA-99-6480, FMCSA-00-7363, FMCSA-01-9561,
FMCSA-03-15892]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
19 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent
to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the
exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective October 30, 2007. Comments must be
received on or before November 14, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Department of
Transportation (DOT) Docket Management System (DMS) Docket Numbers
FMCSA-99-5578, FMCSA-99-6480, FMCSA-00-7363, FMCSA-01-9561, FMCSA-03-
15892, using any of the following methods.
     DOT Web site: http://dmses.dot.gov. Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground level of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
 Follow the online instructions for submitting

comments.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and docket numbers for
this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without change
to http://dms.dot.gov, including any personal information included.

Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://dms.dot.gov at any time or Room W12-140 on the

ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The DMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the Department of Transportation's complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477; Apr. 11, 2000). This information is also available at http://dms.dot.gov
.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Chief, Physical
Qualifications Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,

Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-
224, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5
p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 19 individuals who have requested a renewal
of their exemption in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 19 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Lauren C. Allen
Tracey A. Ammons
Randy B. Combs
Robert L. Cross, Jr.
James D. Davis
Edward J. Genovese
Dewayne E. Harms
Mark D. Kraft
David F. LeClerc
Charles L. Lovern
Jimmy R. Millage
Carson E. Rohrbaugh
Robert E. Sanders
Donald J. Snider
John A. Sortman
Jesse L. Townsend
James A. Welch
Edward W. Yeates, Jr.
Michael E. Yount

    These exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual have a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and
(b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise
physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual
provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the
medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3)
that each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification
to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file and
retain a copy of the certification on his/her person while driving for
presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement
official. Each exemption will be valid for two years unless rescinded
earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 19 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (64 FR 27027; 64 FR 51568; 66 FR 48504; 68 FR 54775; 70 FR
61165; 64 FR 68195; 65 FR 20251; 67 FR 17102; 65 FR 45817; 65 FR 77066;
68 FR 1654; 66 FR 30502; 66 FR 41654; 68 FR 52811; 68 FR 61860). Each
of these 19 applicants has requested renewal of the exemption and has
submitted evidence showing that the vision in the better eye continues
to meet the standard specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the
vision impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each record of
safety while driving with the respective vision deficiencies over the
past two years indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision
exemption standards. These factors provide an adequate basis for
predicting each driver's ability to continue to drive safely in
interstate commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the
exemption for each renewal applicant for a period of two years is
likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by November 14, 2007.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 19 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was based on the merits of each
case and only after careful consideration of the comments received to
its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all of these drivers, are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

    Issued on: October 5, 2007.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E7-20204 Filed 10-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18802-18804]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7478]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0120, EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0121, and EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0060;
FRL-9652-9]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collections;
Request for Comment on Three Proposed Information Collection Requests
(ICRs)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew three existing approved Information
Collection Requests (ICRs) to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). These ICRs are scheduled to expire between July 31, 2012 and
August 31, 2012. Before submitting the ICRs to OMB for review and
approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of these
proposed information collection requests as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 29, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by the Docket ID numbers
provided for each item in the text, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Air Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Docket Center, (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room
3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to the Docket ID Numbers
identified for each item in the text. EPA's policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public docket without change and may
be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nydia Yanira Reyes-Morales,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Mail
Code 6403J, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How can I access the docket and/or submit comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for each of the ICRs identified
in this document (see the Docket ID numbers for each ICR that are
provided in the text), which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air Docket in the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the Air Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft collection of
information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing
of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the
public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system,
select ``search,'' then key in the Docket ID number identified in this
document.

What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What should I consider when I prepare my comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What information collection activity or ICR does this apply to?

Docket ID No.: EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0120

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
large on-highway heavy-duty engine and vehicle manufacturers.
    Title: Nonconformance Penalties for Heavy-Duty Engines and Heavy-
Duty Vehicles, Including Light-Duty Trucks; Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements (Renewal).
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1285.08, OMB Control No. 2060-0132.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on July 31,
2012. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and are displayed
either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Nonconformance penalties (NCP) provisions allow a
manufacturer to introduce into commerce heavy-duty engines (HDEs) or
heavy-duty vehicles (HDVs), including light-duty trucks (LDTs), which
fail to conform to certain emission standards, upon payment of a
monetary penalty. The information collection activities for the NCP
program include the collection of periodic reports and other
information which the manufacturer creates and submits to the Diesel
Engine Compliance Center (DECC), Compliance Division (CD), Office of
Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ), Office of Air and Radiation
(OAR), of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). DECC uses
this information to ensure that manufacturers are in compliance with
applicable regulations and the Clean Air Act (CAA) and have paid the
appropriate penalties. The information submitted in the manufacturers'
NCP reports is stored in DECC's computer tracking system to ensure
accurate accounting of NCP payments. Since nonconformance penalties and
associated Production Compliance Audits (PCA) are an option selected by
manufacturers, EPA cannot be certain how many engine families
manufacturers will request to be included in the NCP program each year.
Likewise, we cannot be certain of the number of PCAs that will be
conducted each model year. However, EPA estimates for ICR purposes,
that six engine families will be included in the NCP program each model
year.
    Besides DECC, this information could be used by the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) and the Department of
Justice for enforcement purposes. Non-Confidential Business Information
(CBI) information may be disclosed upon request under the Freedom of
Information Act to trade associations, environmental groups, and the
public.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 589
hours per year. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is under review and briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 2.
    Frequency of response: Quarterly, Annually, On Occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
26.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 1,178 hours.
    Estimated total annual costs: $94,999. This includes an estimated
burden cost of $76,819.28 and an estimated cost of $18,180.00 for
capital investment or maintenance and operational costs.

Docket ID No.: EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0121

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
manufacturers, importers or vendors of on-road heavy duty vehicles, and
all categories of nonroad engines and nonroad equipment.
    Title: Exclusion Determinations for New Nonroad Spark-ignited, New
Nonroad Compression-ignited Engines, and New On-road Heavy Duty Engines
(Renewal).
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1852.05, OMB Control No. 2060-0395.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on July 31,
2012. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and are displayed
either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Under the provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the
Administrator is required to promulgate regulations to control air
pollutant emissions from motor vehicles and nonroad engines, as defined
in the CAA. Motor vehicles and non-road engines not meeting the
applicable definitions are excluded from compliance with current
regulations. A manufacturer may make an exclusion determination by
itself; however, manufacturers and importers may routinely request EPA
to make such determination to ensure that their determination does not
differ from the Agency's. To request an exclusion determination,
manufacturers submit a letter with a description of the engine and/or
vehicle (engine type, horsepower rating, intended usage, etc.) and
sales brochures or pictures, to either the Gasoline Engine Compliance
Center (GECC) or the Diesel Engine Compliance Center (DECC). Both
Centers are part of Compliance Division (CD), Office of Transportation
and Air Quality (OTAQ). GECC and DECC use this information to determine
whether the engine or vehicle is excluded from compliance with one or
more emission regulations. GECC and DECC then store the data in its
internal files, and make it available to the public upon request under
the Freedom of Information Act.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average seven
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying

information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and
providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements which have
subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a
collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the
collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 12.
    Frequency of response: Annual or On Occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 3.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 69.
    Estimated total annual costs: $5,654. This includes an estimated
burden cost of $5,538 and an estimated cost of $116 for capital
investment or maintenance and operational costs.

Docket Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0060

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by these actions
are manufacturers of nonroad spark-ignition engines, including marine
spark ignition engines.
    Title: Emissions Certification and Compliance Requirements for
Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines.
    EPA ICR Number: 1695.10, OMB Control Number 2060-0338.
    Abstract: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on August 31,
2012. This information collection is requested under the authority of
Title II of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.). Under this
Title, EPA is charged with issuing certificates of conformity for those
engines which comply with applicable emission standards. Such a
certificate must be issued before engines may be legally introduced
into commerce. To apply for a certificate of conformity, manufacturers
are required to submit descriptions of their planned production line,
including detailed descriptions of the emission control system, and
test data. This information is organized by ``engine family'' groups
expected to have similar emission characteristics. The emission values
achieved during certification testing may also be used in the
Averaging, Banking, and Trading (ABT) Program. The program allows
manufacturers to bank credits for engine families that emit below the
standard and use the credits for families that emit above the standard.
They may also trade banked credits with other manufacturers.
Participation in the ABT program is voluntary. Different categories of
spark-ignition engines may also be required to comply with production-
line testing and in-use testing. There are also recordkeeping and
labeling requirements. In this notice, former ICR 1722.06 (``Emission
Certification and Compliance Requirements for Spark-Ignition Marine
Engine, OMB Control Number 2060-0321) and portions of former ICR
2251.03 (Control of Emissions from Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines and
Equipment, OMB Control Number 2060-0603) are being incorporated into
ICR 1695.10. This action is undertaken to consolidate certification and
compliance information requirements for spark-ignition engines into one
ICR for simplification. With this consolidation, we combine all the
certification and compliance burden associated with the spark-ignition
engine industry.
    This information is collected electronically by the Gas Engine
Compliance Center (GECC), Compliance Division, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality (OTAQ), Office of Air and Radiation of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. GECC uses this information to ensure
that manufacturers are in compliance with applicable regulations and
the Clean Air Act (CAA). It may also be used by the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) and the Department of
Justice for enforcement purposes. Non-Confidential Business Information
(CBI) may be disclosed on OTAQ's Web site or upon request under the
Freedom of Information Act to trade associations, environmental groups,
and the public.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 127
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is under review and briefly summarized here (the following
numbers represent consolidated burden for the three combined ICRs):
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 864.
    Frequency of response: Annual or On Occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
3.14.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 345,159.
    Estimated total annual costs: $41,396,380. This includes an
estimated burden cost of $22,146,947 and an estimated cost of
$19,249,433 for capital investment or maintenance and operational
costs.

Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    To date, there are no changes in the number of hours in the total
estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR
currently approved by OMB. However, EPA is still evaluating information
that may lead to a change in the estimates.

What is the next step in the process for these ICRs?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICRs as
appropriate. The final ICR packages will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: March 16, 2012.
Byron J. Bunker,
Acting Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2012-7478 Filed 3-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


FINAL INDEX TO DOCKET EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0287

AJO AND MORENCI SECOND 10-YEAR MAINTENACE PLANS

1971 SO2 NAAQS; TECHNICAL CORRECTION, AJO BOUNDARY

DIRECT FINAL RULE AND PROPOSED RULE

A. U.S. EPA Guidance Documents, Policies, and Rulemakings

B. State Plans, Rules, Support Documents, Reports, and Correspondence

C. Additional Documents for Proposed Rulemaking

D. Notices of Proposed Rulemaking and Technical Support Document

E. Public Comments and Related Documents

F. Notices of Final Rulemaking, Reclassification

A. U.S. EPA Guidance Documents, Policies, and Rulemakings

43 FR 8962, Title 40 – Protection of the Environment, Chapter 1 –
Environmental Protection Agency, Subpart C – Air Programs, Part 81 –
Air Quality Control Regions, Criteria, and Control Techniques, Final
rule (March 3, 1978).

44 FR 21261, Air Quality Control Regions, Criteria and Control
Techniques; Attainment Status Designations, final rule (April 10, 1979).

Memorandum dated September 4, 1992, from John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, US EPA, to Air Division Directors, Regions I-X, entitled
“Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment.”

  HYPERLINK
"https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-R09-OAR-2006-0214-0007"
Memorandum dated January 26, 1995, from Sally Shaver, USEPA Air Quality
Strategies and Standards Division, OAQPS, to Regional Office Air
Division Directors, entitled Attainment Demonstration Policy for Sulfur
Dioxide Nonattainment Areas .

Memorandum dated October 18, 2000, from John S. Seitz, Director, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, to Air Division
Directors, Regions I-X, “Redesignation of SO2 Nonattainment Areas in
the Absence of Monitored Data.”

68 FR 62239, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Arizona; direct
final rule (November 3, 2003).

69 FR 22447, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Arizona; direct
final rule (April 26, 2004).

75 FR 35520, Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur
Dioxide; Final rule (June 22, 2010).

Memorandum dated April 11, 2011 from Tyler Fox, Leader, Air Quality
Modeling Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA,
to EPA Regional Modeling Contacts, “AERSCREEN Released as the EPA
Recommended Screening Model.”

80 FR 67319, Revisions to Air Plan; Stationary Sources; New Source
Review; final rule (November 2, 2015).

B. State Plans, Rules, Support Documents, Reports, and Correspondence

1. Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Maintenance Plan for the
Ajo Sulfur Dioxide Planning Area (1971 NAAQS), Air Quality Division,
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, February 2013.

2. Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Maintenance Plan for the
Morenci Sulfur Dioxide Planning Area (1971 NAAQS), Air Quality Division,
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, December 2014.

C. Additional Documents for Proposed Rulemaking

1. National Interagency Fire Center’s website at   HYPERLINK
"https://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_statistics.html"
https://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_statistics.html , “Historical
year-end statistics by state,” accessed May 9, 2016 and August 31,
2016.

2.   HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arizona_wildfires"
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arizona_wildfires , accessed May
9, 2016 and August 31, 2016.

D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Approval of Arizona Air Plan Revisions;
Ajo and Morenci, Arizona; Second 10-Year Sulfur Dioxide Maintenance
Plans and Technical Correction; proposed rule; prepublication version,
signed December 15, 2016.

82 FR XXXXX, Approval of Arizona Air Plan Revisions; Ajo and Morenci,
Arizona; Second 10-Year Sulfur Dioxide Maintenance Plans and Technical
Correction; proposed rule (January  XX, 2017).

E. Public Comments and Related Documents

F. Notice of Final Rulemaking

Notice of Direct Final Rulemaking, Approval of Arizona Air Plan
Revisions; Ajo and Morenci, Arizona; Second 10-Year Sulfur Dioxide
Maintenance Plans and Technical Correction; direct final rule and
technical correction; prepublication version, signed December 15, 2016.

82 FR xxxxx, Approval of Arizona Air Plan Revisions; Ajo and Morenci,
Arizona; Second 10-Year Sulfur Dioxide Maintenance Plans and Technical
Correction; direct final rule and technical correction (January XX,
2017).

 PAGE  2


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 37 (Monday, February 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12813-12814]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04187]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2000-7363; FMCSA-2002-12432; FMCSA-2002-12844; FMCSA-
2004-17984; FMCSA-2004-19477; FMCSA-2006-26066; FMCSA-2008-0231; FMCSA-
2008-0266; FMCSA-2008-0340; FMCSA-2009-0321; FMCSA-2010-0114; FMCSA-
2010-0187; FMCSA-2010-0327; FMCSA-2010-0354; FMCSA-2010-0385]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
19 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to
or greater than the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective February 25, 2013. Comments must be
received on or before March 27, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. [FMCSA-2000-7363; FMCSA-
2002-12432; FMCSA-2002-12844; FMCSA-2004-17984; FMCSA-2004-19477;
FMCSA-2006-26066; FMCSA-2008-0231; FMCSA-2008-0266; FMCSA-2008-0340;
FMCSA-2009-0321; FMCSA-2010-0114; FMCSA-2010-0187; FMCSA-2010-0327;
FMCSA-2010-0354; FMCSA-2010-0385], using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the FDMS published in
the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from

the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 19 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 19 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jose C. Azuara (TX).............  Dennis R. O'Dell, Jr. (OK).
Kenneth L. Bowers, Jr. (MN).....  Jerry W. Parker (OH).
Eddie A. Branham (NC)...........  Gary W. Phelps (PA).
Timothy A. DeFrange (TX)........  Billy R. Pierce (AL).
Andrew G. Fornsel (NY)..........  Myriam Rodriguez (CA).
Wilfred J. Gagnon (VT)..........  Jules M. Sancho, Jr. (LA).
Ricky G. Jacks (AL).............  Henry A. Shelton (AL).
Lester G. Kelley, II (OH).......  Kenneth J. Weaver (WY).
Thomas D. Laws (IN).............  Cameron R. Whitford (NY).
Harry J. McSuley, Jr. (PA)......  ......................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for
two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 19 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (65 FR 45821; 65 FR 77066; 67 FR 54525; 67 FR 68719; 68 FR
1654; 68 FR 2629; 68 FR 8794; 69 FR 33997; 69 FR 61293; 69 FR 64806; 69
FR 71098; 69 FR 71100; 70 FR 2705; 70 FR 8659; 71 FR 63380; 72 FR 1050;
72 FR 1054; 72 FR 184; 72 FR 5489; 73 FR 46973; 73 FR 51689; 73 FR
54888; 73 FR 63047; 73 FR 75803; 73 FR 78421; 73 FR 78422; 74 FR 6207;
74 FR 6209; 74 FR 981; 75 FR 1835; 75 FR 9482; 75 FR 34209; 75 FR
47883; 75 FR 47886; 75 FR 63255; 75 FR 65057; 75 FR 72863; 75 FR 77942;
75 79081; 75 FR 79083; 76 FR 2190; 76 FR 4413; 76 FR 4414; 76 FR 5425;
76 FR 8809). Each of these 19 applicants has requested renewal of the
exemption and has submitted evidence showing that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirement specified at 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is stable. In addition, a
review of each record of safety while driving with the respective
vision deficiencies over the past two years indicates each applicant
continues to meet the vision exemption requirements.
    These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each
renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by March 27, 2013.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 19 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

    Issued on: February 12, 2013.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-04187 Filed 2-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47300-47301]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21894]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0384]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Hearing

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces decision to renew exemptions for five
individuals from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these hard of hearing and deaf
individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable June 10, 2017. The exemptions
will expire on June 10, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and/or Room W12-140 on the
ground level of the

West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed
at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On July 3, 2017, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision
to renew exemptions for five individuals from the hearing standard in
49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and
requested comments from the public (82 FR 30939). The public comment
period ended on August 2, 2017, and no comments were received.
    As stated in the previous notice, FMCSA has evaluated the
eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these
exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater
than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current
regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically
qualified to driver a CMV if that person:

    First perceives a forced whispered voice in the better ear at
not less than 5 feet with or without the use of a hearing aid or, if
tested by use of an audiometric device, does not have an average
hearing loss in the better ear greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz,
1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a hearing aid when the
audiometric device is calibrated to American National Standard
(formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5-1951.

    49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) was adopted in 1970, with a revision in 1971
to allow drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a
hearing aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 3,
1971).

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in response to this preceding.

IV. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the five renewal exemption
applications, FMCSA announces its' decision to exempt the following
drivers from the hearing requirement in 49 CFR 391.41 (b)(11).
    As of June 10, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions
for obtaining an exemption from the hearing requirement in the FMCSRs
for interstate CMV drivers. (82 FR 30939):

Thomas Carr (PA)
Richard Knapp (WI)
Keith Miller (PA)
Jeffrey Webber (OK)
Michael Wilkes (MA)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0384. Their
exemptions were applicable on June 10, 2017, and will expire on June
10, 2019.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315, each exemption will be valid
for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and
31315.

    Issued on: October 2, 2017.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-21894 Filed 10-10-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 133 (Wednesday, July 13, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41771-41774]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14875]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-95215; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2022-036]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Its Fee Schedule

July 7, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 1, 2022, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BZX'') proposes to
amend its Fee Schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule applicable to its
equities trading platform (``BZX Equities'') by: (i) introducing a new
Step-Up Tier 3 and (ii) modifying the criteria in Single MPID Investor
Tier 1. The Exchange proposes to implement these changes effective July
1, 2022.
    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the
Exchange is only one of 16 registered equities exchanges, as well as a
number of alternative trading systems and other off-exchange venues
that do not have similar self-regulatory responsibilities under the
Exchange Act, to which market participants may direct their order flow.
Based on publicly available information,\3\ no single registered
equities exchange has more than 16% of the market share. Thus, in such
a low-concentrated and highly competitive market, no single equities
exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of order
flow. The Exchange in particular operates a ``Maker-Taker'' model
whereby it pays rebates to members that add liquidity and assesses fees
to those that remove liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Equities Market Volume
Summary, Month-to-Date (June 27, 2022), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_statistics/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's Fee Schedule sets forth the standard rebates and
rates applied per share for orders that provide and remove liquidity,
respectively. Currently, for orders in securities priced at or above
$1.00, the Exchange provides a standard rebate of $0.00160 per share
for orders that add liquidity and assesses a fee of $0.0030 per share
for orders that remove liquidity. For orders in securities priced below
$1.00, the Exchange does not provide a rebate or assess a fee for
orders that add liquidity and assesses a fee of 0.30% of total dollar
value for orders that remove liquidity. Additionally, in response to
the competitive environment, the Exchange also offers tiered pricing,
which provides Members with opportunities to qualify for higher rebates
or lower fees where certain volume criteria and thresholds are met.
Tiered pricing provides an incremental

incentive for Members to strive for higher tier levels, which provides
increasingly higher benefits or discounts for satisfying more stringent
criteria.
Step-Up Tier 3
    Pursuant to footnote 2 of the Fee Schedule, the Exchange currently
offers two Step-Up Tiers that provide Members an opportunity to qualify
for an enhanced rebate for liquidity adding orders that yield fee codes
B,\4\ V,\5\ and Y \6\ where they increase their relative liquidity each
month over a predetermined baseline. The Exchange notes that Step-Up
Tiers are designed to encourage Members that provide displayed
liquidity on the Exchange to increase their order flow, which would
benefit all Members by providing greater execution opportunities on the
Exchange. Now the Exchange proposes to add an additional Step-Up Tier 3
to footnote 2 of the Fee Schedule. Proposed Step-Up Tier 3 is as
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Orders yielding Fee Code ``B'' are displayed orders adding
liquidity to BZX (Tape B).
    \5\ Orders yielding Fee Code ``V'' are displayed orders adding
liquidity to BZX (Tape A).
    \6\ Orders yielding Fee Cody ``Y'' are displayed orders adding
liquidity to BZX (Tape C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Proposed Step-Up Tier 3 offers an enhanced rebate of
$0.0032 per share for qualifying orders (i.e., orders yielding fee code
B, V or Y) where an MPID (i) has a Step-Up ADAV \7\ from May 2021
greater than or equal to 30,000,000 shares or MPID has a Step-Up Add
TCV \8\ from May 2021 greater than or equal to 0.30%; and (ii) MPID has
an ADV \9\ greater than or equal to 0.30% of the TCV \10\ or MPID has
an ADV greater than or equal to 35,000,000 shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Step-Up ADAV'' means ADAV in the relevant baseline month
subtracted from current ADAV. ADAV means average daily added volume
calculated as the number of shares added per day and is calculated
on a monthly basis.
    \8\ ``Step-Up Add TCV'' means ADAV as a percentage of TCV in the
relevant baseline month subtracted from current ADAV as a percentage
of TCV.
    \9\ ``ADV'' means average daily volume calculated as the number
of shares added or removed, combined, per day. ADV is calculated on
a monthly basis.
    \10\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
volume reported by all exchanges and trade reporting facilities to a
consolidated transaction reporting plan for the month for which the
fees apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that the Step-Up tiers, including proposed Step-
Up Tier 3, are designed to provide Members with additional
opportunities to receive enhanced rebates by increasing their order
flow to the Exchange, which further contributes to a deeper, more
liquid market and provides even more execution opportunities for active
market participants. The proposed change is designed to give Members an
additional opportunity to receive an enhanced rebate for orders meeting
the applicable threshold. Furthermore, the proposed Step-Up Tier 3 is
designed to increase the Members' provision of liquidity to the
Exchange, which increases execution opportunities and provides for
overall enhanced price discovery and price improvement opportunities on
the Exchange. Increased overall order flow benefits all Members by
contributing towards a robust and well-balanced market ecosystem.
Single MPID Investor Tier 1
    The Single MPID Investor Tier set forth under footnote 4 of the Fee
Schedule provides an enhanced rebate of $0.0032 \11\ or $0.0033 \12\
per share for qualifying orders which yield fee codes B,\13\ V,\14\ or
Y.\15\ The Exchange proposes to amend the criteria necessary to achieve
Tier 1 under footnote 4 as described below. Currently, under Tier 1 a
Member may receive an enhanced rebate where their MPID has: (i) a Step-
Up ADV \16\ as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.10% from
May 2021 or the MPID has a Step-Up ADV greater than or equal to
8,000,000 shares from May 2021; and (ii) the MPID has an ADAV as a
percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.55% or the MPID has an
ADAV greater than or equal to 50,000,000 shares. The Exchange is
proposing to amend the criteria under Tier 1 as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ An enhanced rebate of $0.0032 per share is paid to MPIDs
who satisfy the criteria in Tier 1 in Tape B securities.
    \12\ An enhanced rebate of $0.0033 per share is paid to MPIDs
who satisfy the criteria in Tier 1 in Tape A or Tape C securities.
    \13\ Supra note 4.
    \14\ Supra note 4 [sic].
    \15\ Supra note 6.
    \16\ ``Step-Up ADV'' means ADV in the relevant baseline month
subtracted from current day ADV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Proposed Single MPID Tier 1 offers an enhanced rebate of
$0.0032 or $0.0033 per share for qualifying orders (i.e., those
yielding fee codes B, V or Y) where an MPID (i) has a Step-Up ADV as a
percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.10% from May 2021 or has a
Step-Up ADV of 10,000,000 (as compared to 8,000,000) from May 2021; and
(ii) has an ADAV as a percentage of TCV greater than or equal to 0.50%
(as compared to 0.55%); or MPID has an ADAV greater than or equal to
45,000,000 (as compared to 50,000,000).
    The Exchange believes that Members who strive to achieve the
proposed amended Single MPID Tier 1 criteria continue to be
incentivized to increase the overall amount of liquidity provided on
the Exchange, both add and remove volume, thereby contributing to a
deeper and more liquid market and providing more execution
opportunities to market participants. Incentivizing an increase in both
liquidity adding volume and liquidity removing volume, through revised
criteria and enhanced rebate opportunities, encourages liquidity adding
Members on the Exchange to contribute to a deeper, more liquid market
and to increase transactions and take execution opportunities provided
by such increased activity, together providing for overall enhanced
price discovery and price improvement opportunities on the Exchange. As
such, increased overall order flow benefits all Members by contributing
towards a robust and well-balanced market ecosystem.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\17\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \18\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \19\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange notes that volume-based rebates such as
those proposed herein have been widely adopted by exchanges,\20\
including the Exchange,\21\ and are equitable because they are open to
all Members on an equal basis and provide additional benefits or
discounts that are reasonably related to (i) the value to an exchange's
market quality and (ii) associated higher levels of market activity,
such as higher

levels or liquidity provision and/or growth patterns. The Exchange
believes the proposed Step-Up Tier 3 is reasonable, fair and equitable,
and not unfairly discriminatory because the proposed Tier provides an
additional opportunity for all Members to receive an enhanced rebate by
achieving the proposed threshold. Furthermore, the Exchange believes
that the proposed Step-Up Tier 3 is reasonable as it serves to
incentivize Members to increase their displayed liquidity adding volume
on the Exchange. Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposed
amendments to Single MPID Tier 1 are a reasonable means to encourage
Members to increase their relative add and remove liquidity on the
Exchange each month over a predetermined baseline by offering Members
an enhanced rebate, albeit with slightly modified criteria. Greater add
volume order flow may provide for deeper, more liquid markets and
execution opportunities at improved prices, and greater remove volume
order flow may increase transactions on the Exchange, which the
Exchange believes incentivizes liquidity providers to submit additional
liquidity and execution opportunities. An overall increase in activity
deepens the Exchange's liquidity pool, offers additional cost savings,
supports the quality of price discovery, promotes market transparency
and improves market quality, for all investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See EDGX Equities Fee Schedule, Footnote 1, Add/Remove
Volume Tiers.
    \21\ See BZX Equities Fee Schedule, Footnote 1, Add/Remove
Volume Tiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further believes that the proposed Step-Up Tier 3 and
proposed changes to Single MPID Tier 1 represent an equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges because the
threshold necessary to achieve the tiers encourages Members to add
increased liquidity to the Exchange and the Exchange believes the
proposed and current enhanced rebates, respectively, are commensurate
with the proposed thresholds. The Exchange also believes that the
proposal represents an equitable allocation of fees and rebates and is
not unfairly discriminatory because all Members will be eligible for
the proposed Step-Up Tier 3 and Single MPID Tier 1 enhanced rebates and
will have the opportunity to meet the tiers' criteria and receive the
corresponding enhanced rebate for each tier if such criteria is met.
Without having a view of activity on other markets and off-exchange
venues, the Exchange has no way of knowing whether these proposed
changes would definitely result in any Members qualifying for the
proposed Step-Up Tier 3 or Single MPID Tier 1. While the Exchange has
no way of predicting with certainty how the proposed changes will
impact Member activity, the Exchange anticipates one Member will be
able to compete for and reach the criteria under proposed Step-Up Tier
3 and anticipates three Members may be able to compete for and reach
the proposed amended criteria under Single MPID Tier 1. The Exchange
also notes that the proposed changes will not adversely impact any
Member's ability to qualify for reduced fees or enhanced rebates
offered under other tiers. Should a Member not meet the proposed new
criteria, the Member will merely not receive that corresponding
enhanced rebate.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    Particularly, the proposed Step-Up Tier 3 and proposed amendments
to Single MPID Tier 1 do not impose a burden on intramarket competition
that is not in furtherance of the Act in that each tier will be
eligible to all Members equally in that all Members have the
opportunity to submit orders in an attempt to satisfy the proposed
amended criteria and receive the enhanced rebates associated with each
tier. Furthermore, the Exchange believes that the criteria under
proposed Step-Up Tier 3 and the proposed amended criteria under Single
MPID Tier 1 will continue to incentivize Members to submit additional
liquidity to the Exchange and to increase their order flow on the
Exchange generally, thereby contributing to a deeper and more liquid
market and promoting price discovery and market quality on the Exchange
to the benefit of all market participants and enhancing the
attractiveness of the Exchange as a trading venue, which the Exchange
believes, in turn, would continue to encourage market participants to
direct additional order flow to the Exchange. Greater liquidity
benefits all Members by providing more trading opportunities and
encourages Members to send additional orders to the Exchange, thereby
contributing to robust levels of liquidity, which benefits all market
participants.
    The Exchange believes the proposed Step-Up Tier 3 and proposed
amendments to Single MPID Tier 1 do not impose a burden on intermarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe that the proposed
changes represent a significant departure from pricing currently
offered by the Exchange or pricing offered by other equities exchanges.
Members may opt to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they believe that
alternatives offer them better value. Accordingly, the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed changes will impair the ability of
Members or competing venues to maintain their competitive standing in
the financial markets. As previously discussed, the Exchange operates
in a highly competitive market. Members have numerous alternative
venues that they may participate on and direct their order flow,
including other equities exchanges, off-exchange venues, and
alternative trading systems. Additionally, the Exchange represents a
small percentage of the overall market. Based on publicly available
information, no single equities exchange has more than 16% of the
market share.\22\ Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing
power in the execution of order flow. Indeed, participants can readily
choose to send their orders to other exchange and off-exchange venues
if they deem fee levels at those other venues to be more favorable.
Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for
competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically, in
Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \23\ The fact
that this market is competitive has also long been recognized by the
courts. In NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C.
Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one disputes that competition for
order flow is `fierce.'. . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S.
national market system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the
broker-dealers that act as their order-routing agents, have a wide
range of choices of where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no
exchange can afford to take its market share percentages for granted'
because `no exchange possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in
the execution of order flow from broker dealers'. . .''.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Supra note 3.
    \23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \24\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \25\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \26\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeBZX-2022-036 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2022-036. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2022-036 and should be submitted
on or before August 3, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-14875 Filed 7-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


                     Public Notice:  Request For Comments

       The EPA proposes to issue a renewed Air Quality Permit to Operate
         for WBI Energy Transmission, Inc. - Hardin Compressor Station
                        on the Crow Indian Reservation

Public Notice Issued:
April 27, 2023
When are written comments due?
5:00 p.m., MST, May 29, 2023
The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that the EPA proposes to issue a draft air quality permit to operate and invites the public to submit written comments on this proposed permit through the processes described in this notice.
Because the facility is located on the Crow Indian Reservation and because the Tribe does not have an EPA-approved permitting program, it is the EPA's responsibility as the permitting authority to take action on the facility's air permit application.
What is being proposed?
The EPA proposes to issue a renewed federal Clean Air Act Title V Permit to Operate in accordance with 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 71, for:
Hardin Compressor Station
Crow Indian Reservation
Big Horn County, Montana
Latitude 45.73887, Longitude -107.544
The facility is a natural gas compressor station that emits regulated air pollutants. This permitting action allows the facility to continue operating for another 5 years but does not authorize an increase in emissions.
Permit Number:
V-C-000001-2022.00
How can I review documents?
You can review the draft Operating Permit, the Statement of Basis, the application and other supporting materials, including all data submitted by the applicant, at the following locations during which the record will be open for public inspection:
Crow Indian Reservation
P.O. Box 159
Crow Agency, Montana
Attn: Marvin (Wes) Stops, Jr., Environmental Director, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
U.S. EPA Region 8 Office
Contact: Suman Kunwar, Environmental Engineer, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Hours: 8:00 a.m.- 4:00 p.m.
excluding federal holidays
Electronic copies may also be accessed and viewed at:
http://www.epa.gov/caa-permitting/caa-permit-public-comment-opportunities-region-8
For TTY users: please call the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
How can I make comments?
The EPA will accept written comments by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(include WBI Energy Transmission, Inc. - Hardin Compressor Station in the subject line); through https://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID #EPA-R08-OAR-2022-0713); and by mail to the address below:
Title V Permit Coordinator
U.S. EPA, Region 8 Air and Radiation Division
(8ARD-PM)
1595 Wynkoop Street
Denver, Coloardo  80202
How do I get additional information?
U.S. EPA, Region 8
Air and Radiation Division (8ARD-PM)
1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202
Hours: Mon-Fri 8:00 a.m.  -  5:00 p.m.
Contact: Suman Kunwar,
Environmental Engineer,
at<PHONE_NUMBER>
or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Will there be a public hearing?
No public hearing has been scheduled; however, you may request a public hearing. A request for a hearing must be submitted within 15 days of this notice and must include the nature of the issues to be raised at the hearing. The EPA will base its decision on whether a hearing will be held upon the showing of a significant degree of public interest.
What happens next?
The EPA will review and consider all comments received during the comment period. Following this review, the EPA may issue the permit, issue the permit with revisions or deny the permit.