[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 28, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 19134]
[FR Doc No: E9-9635]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[USCG-2009-0283]

Drawbridge Operating Regulations; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway,
Galveston, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
Galveston Causeway Railroad Bascule Bridge across the Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway, mile 357.2 west of Harvey Locks, at Galveston, Galveston
County, Texas. This deviation provides for the bridge to remain closed
to navigation for five hours a day for 14 non-consecutive days in order
to perform scheduled maintenance.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on Monday, May 11, 2009
until noon on Wednesday, June 3, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2009-0283 and are available online
at www.regulations.gov, selecting the Advanced Docket Search Option on
the right side of the screen, inserting USCG-2009-0283 in the Docket ID
box, pressing Enter, and then clicking on the item in the Docket ID
column. This material is also available for inspection or copying at
the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call David Frank, Bridge Administration Branch, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Burlington Northern Railway Company has
requested a temporary deviation in order to perform necessary
maintenance on the rail joints of the Galveston Causeway Railroad
Bascule Bridge across the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, mile 357.2 west
of Harvey Locks, at Galveston, Galveston County, Texas. The maintenance
is essential for the continued safe operation of the railroad bridge.
This temporary deviation will allow the bridge to remain in the closed-
to-navigation position from 7 a.m. until noon, Monday through Thursday
from Monday, May 11, 2009 until Wednesday, June 3, 2009. The bridge
will operate normally for the passage of vessels on Memorial Day,
Monday, May 27, 2009. During the closure the draw will be able to open
for emergencies after securing the ties on the bridge. Currently, the
draw opens on signal for the passage of vessels.
    The bridge has a vertical clearance of 10 feet above mean high
water in the closed-to-navigation position. Navigation at the site of
the bridge consists mainly of tows with barges and some recreational
pleasure craft. Due to prior experience, as well as coordination with
waterway users, it has been determined that this closure will not have
a significant effect on these vessels. No alternate routes are
available. This closure is considered necessary for repair of the
bridge.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: April 13, 2009.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
 [FR Doc. E9-9635 Filed 4-27-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 122 (Tuesday, June 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41610-41611]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13613]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER23-2190-000]

SR DeSoto III, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
SR DeSoto III, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is July 11, 2023.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: June 21, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-13613 Filed 6-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

	     Issued by the Department of Transportation on November 20, 2000

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2000-7986

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no

additional confirming order will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  AOM-Minerve						Date Filed:  September 22, 2000

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 U.S.C. 41301 and statement of
authorization pursuant to 14 CFR 212 of the Department’s regulations
to display the airline designator code of Air Caledonie S.A. on flights
between Noumea, New Caledonia, and Los Angeles, CA.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority

Applicant representative:  Susan Gotbetter<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved									Action date:  November 20, 2000

Effective dates of exemption authority granted:  November 20, 2000  -
November 20, 2002

Effective dates of statement of authorization granted:  Indefinite,
subject to attached conditions

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  U.S.-France Air
Transport Services Agreement.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

X  Standard exemption conditions (attached)

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

We found that the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within ten (10) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

												        Appendix A

FOREIGN AIR CARRIER CONDITIONS OF AUTHORITY

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the holder shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36;

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are:

   (a)  based on its operations in international air transportation
that, according to the contract of carriage, include a point in the
United States as a point of origin, point of destination, or agreed
stopping place, or for which the contract of carriage was purchased in
the United States; or

   (b)  based on a claim under any international agreement or treaty
cognizable in any court or other tribunal of the United States.

In this condition, the term "international air transportation" means
"international transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention,
except that all States shall be considered to be High Contracting
Parties for the purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, comply (except as otherwise
provided in the applicable bilateral agreement) with the Department's
rules governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code (formerly the
Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended).

(41301/40109) 9/98

Attachment --  Docket OST-00-7986

The code-share operations authorized here are subject to the following
conditions:

(a)  The statement of authorization will remain in effect only as long
as (i) AOM-Minerve and Air Caledonie continue to hold the necessary
underlying authority to operate the code-share services at issue, and
(ii) the code-share agreement providing for the code-share operations
remains in effect.

(b)  AOM-Minerve and/or Air Caledonie must promptly notify the
Department if the code-share agreement providing for the code-share
operations is no longer effective or the carriers decide to cease
operating any or all of the approved code-share services.   Such notices
should be filed in Docket OST-00-7986. 1

(c)  The code-sharing operations conducted under this authority must
comply with 14 CFR 257 and with any amendments to the Department’s
regulations concerning code-share arrangements that may be adopted.
Notwithstanding any provisions in the contract between the carriers, our
approval here is expressly conditioned upon the requirements that the
subject foreign air transportation be sold in the name of the carrier
holding out such service in computer reservation systems and elsewhere;
that the carrier selling such transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on
the ticket) accept responsibility for the entirety of the code-share
journey for all obligations established in its contract of carriage with
the passenger; and that the passenger liability of the operating carrier
be unaffected.

(d)  The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that
neither carrier shall give any force or effect to any contractual
provisions between themselves that are contrary to these conditions.

______________________

1  We expect this notification to be received within 10 days of such
non-effectiveness or of such decision.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 14, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 49510]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19652]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP13-526-000]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Request Under
Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on July 24, 2013, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company,
LLC (Tennessee), 1001 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas 77002, filed in
Docket No. CP13-526-000, a prior notice request pursuant to sections
157.205, 157.210, and 157.211(a)(2) of the Commission's regulations
under the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Tennessee seeks authorization to
modify and operate meter station facilities and appurtenances located
in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania. Tennessee proposes to perform
these activities under its blanket certificate issued in Docket No.
CP82-413-000 [20 FERC ] 62,409 (1982)], all as more fully set forth in
the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection.
    The filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-
free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Thomas G. Joyce, Manager, Certificates, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company,
LLC, 1001 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas 77002, or by calling (713)
420-3299 (telephone) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to section 157.205 of
the Commission's Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205) a protest
to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed
therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized
effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is
filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for
filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an
application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a) (1) (iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing'' link. Persons unable to file
electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest
or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. See, 18CFR 385.2001(a) (1) (iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing''
link.

    Dated: August 6, 2013.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-19652 Filed 8-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 18, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 158)]
[Notices]
[Page 41778-41780]
[DOCID:fr18au09-91]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60458; File No. SR-NYSEAMEX-2009-52]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NYSE Amex LLC Deleting Rule
409A--NYSE Amex Equities and Adopting New Rule 2266--NYSE Amex Equities
To Conform to Proposed Rule Changes Submitted in a Companion Filing by
the New York Stock Exchange LLC

August 7, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on July 28, 2009, NYSE Amex LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
Amex'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange, formerly the American Stock Exchange LLC and NYSE
Alternext US LLC,\4\ proposes to delete Rule 409A--NYSE Amex Equities
and to adopt new Rule 2266--NYSE Amex Equities to conform to proposed
rule changes submitted in a companion filing by the New York Stock
Exchange LLC (``NYSE'').\5\ The text of the proposed rule change is
available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and
http://www.nyse.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange changed its name to NYSE Amex in March 2009.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59575 (March 13, 2009), 74
FR 11803 (March 19, 2009) (SR-NYSEALTR-2009-24).
    \5\ See SR-NYSE-2009-76, formally submitted on July 28, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule changes is to delete Rule 409A--
NYSE Amex Equities and to adopt new Rule 2266--NYSE Amex Equities to
conform to proposed rule changes submitted in a companion filing by the
NYSE.
Background
    As described more fully in a related rule filing,\6\ NYSE Euronext
acquired The Amex Membership Corporation (``AMC'') pursuant to an
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated January 17, 2008 (the ``Merger'').
In connection with the Merger, the Exchange's predecessor, the American
Stock Exchange LLC, a subsidiary of AMC, became a subsidiary of NYSE
Euronext called NYSE Alternext US LLC, and continues to operate as a
national securities exchange registered under Section 6 of the Act.\7\
The effective date of the Merger was October 1, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58673 (September 29,
2008), 73 FR 57707 (October 3, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-60 and SR-Amex
2008-62) (approving the Merger).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the Merger, on December 1, 2008, the Exchange
relocated all equities trading conducted on the Exchange legacy trading
systems and facilities located at 86 Trinity Place, New York, New York,
to trading systems and facilities located at 11 Wall Street, New York,
New York (the ``Equities Relocation''). The Exchange's equity trading
systems and facilities at 11 Wall Street (the ``NYSE Amex Trading
Systems'') are operated by the NYSE on behalf of the Exchange.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58705 (October 1,
2008), 73 FR 58995 (October 8, 2008) (SR-Amex 2008-63) (approving
the Equities Relocation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the Equities Relocation, NYSE Amex adopted NYSE Rules 1-
1004, subject to such changes as necessary to apply the Rules to the
Exchange, as the NYSE Amex Equities Rules to govern trading on the NYSE
Amex Trading Systems.\9\ The NYSE Amex Equities Rules, which became
operative on December 1, 2008, are substantially identical to the
current NYSE Rules 1-1004 and the Exchange continues to update the NYSE
Amex Equities Rules as necessary to conform with rule changes to
corresponding NYSE Rules filed by the NYSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 58705 (October 1,
2008), 73 FR 58995 (October 8, 2008) (SR-Amex 2008-63); 58833
(October 22, 2008), 73 FR 64642 (October 30, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-
106); 58839 (October 23, 2008), 73 FR 64645 (October 30, 2008) (SR-
NYSEALTR-2008-03); 59022 (November 26, 2008), 73 FR 73683 (December
3, 2008) (SR-NYSEALTR-2008-10); and 59027 (November 28, 2008), 73 FR
73681 (December 3, 2008) (SR-NYSEALTR-2008-11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Conforming Amendments to NYSE Amex Equities Rules
    As noted above, the Exchange proposes to delete Rule 409A--NYSE
Amex Equities and to adopt new Rule 2266--NYSE Amex Equities to conform
to proposed rule changes submitted in a companion filing by the NYSE.
As discussed in more detail below, the NYSE is filing the proposed rule
changes to harmonize these NYSE Rules with changes to corresponding
Incorporated NYSE Rules filed by the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') and approved by the Commission.\10\ Unless
specifically noted, the Exchange is proposing to adopt the NYSE's
proposed rule changes in the form that they have been approved for
filing by the Commission, subject to such technical changes as are
necessary to apply the changes to the Exchange. The Exchange further
proposes that the operative date of these rule changes be the same as
the operative date of the NYSE's proposed rule changes on which this
filing is based.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59987 (May 27,
2009), 74 FR 26902 (June 4, 2009) (order approving FINRA 2009-016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In relevant part, FINRA adopted NASD Rule 2342 (SIPC Information)
as consolidated FINRA Rule 2266 and, because it is substantively
similar to this new rule, deleted FINRA Incorporated NYSE Rule 409A
(SIPC Disclosures).\11\ FINRA Rule 2266 requires all FINRA members,
except for those members that are not Securities Investor Protection
Corporation (``SIPC'') members or whose business consists exclusively
of the sale of investments that are not subject to SIPC protection, to
advise all new customers in writing at the time they open an account
that they may obtain information about SIPC by contacting SIPC and to
provide such customers with SIPC's contact information.\12\ Such
information must also be provided annually to all existing customers.
Where both an introducing firm and a clearing firm service the same
account, the firms may assign these requirements to one or the other
firm.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ In its filing, FINRA also adopted NASD Rules 2130
(Obtaining an Order of Expungement of Customer Dispute Information
from the Central Registration Depository (CRD System)), 2810 (Direct
Participation Programs) and 3115 (Requirements for Alternative
Trading Systems to Record and Transmit Order and Execution
Information for Security Futures) as consolidated FINRA Rules 2080,
2310 and 4551, respectively. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
59987 (May 27, 2009), 74 FR 26902 (June 4, 2009). Neither the
Exchange nor NYSE is adopting these FINRA Rules.
    \12\ FINRA Incorporated NYSE Rule 409A did not contain these
exclusions. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59987 (May 27,
2009), 74 FR 26902 (June 4, 2009).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59987 (May 27,
2009), 74 FR 26902 (June 4, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE correspondingly proposes to delete NYSE Rule 409A and to adopt
new Rule 2266 to conform to FINRA's approved amendments to its Rules.
As proposed, NYSE Rule 2266 adopts the same language as FINRA Rule
2266, except for substituting for or adding to, as needed, the term
``member organization'' for the term ``member'', and making
corresponding technical changes. As with the consolidated FINRA Rule,
under proposed NYSE Rule 2266 Exchange members and member organizations
will be required to provide SIPC disclosures to all new customers upon
opening an account and to existing customers on an annual basis.
    The Exchange proposes to correspondingly delete Rule 409A--NYSE
Amex Equities and to adopt new Rule 2266--NYSE Amex Equities in the
form proposed by the NYSE, subject to adding ``-NYSE Amex Equities'' to
the title of the Rule.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\14\ in general, and further the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in particular, in that
they are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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. The proposed rule changes also support the principles
of Section 11A(a)(1) \16\ of the Act in that they seek to ensure the
economically efficient execution of securities transactions and fair
competition among brokers and dealers and among exchange markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes support the
objectives of the Act by providing greater harmonization among NYSE
Rules, NYSE Amex Equities Rules and

FINRA Rules of similar purpose, resulting in less burdensome and more
efficient regulatory compliance for their common members and member
organizations. To the extent the Exchange has proposed changes that
differ from the NYSE version of these Rules, such changes are technical
in nature and do not change the substance of the proposed NYSE Amex
Equities Rules.

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.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \17\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\18\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied the requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \20\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\21\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission believes
waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. Acceleration of the operative date
will allow the immediate change of the NYSE Amex's rule to make it
consistent with the FINRA rule, thereby making compliance for dual
members less burdensome. For these reasons, the Commission designates
the proposal to be effective and operative upon filing.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \22\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay of
the proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAMEX-2009-52 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMEX-2009-52. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 Web site (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 inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of NYSE.
    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMEX-2009-
52 and should be submitted on or before September 8, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-19731 Filed 8-17-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 201 (Tuesday, October 18, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64236-64237]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26469]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0380; Airspace Docket No. 11-AEA-12]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; New Market, VA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E Airspace at New Market, VA, to
accommodate the new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures serving New
Market Airport. This action enhances the safety and airspace management
of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations within the National
Airspace System. This action also makes a minor adjustment to the
geographic coordinates of the airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, December 15, 2011. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On July 25, 2011, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to establish Class E airspace at New
Market, VA (76 FR 44288). Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Subsequent to
publication, the FAA found that the geographic coordinates needed to be
adjusted; this rule makes that adjustment. Class E airspace
designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9V dated
August 9, 2011, and effective September

15, 2011, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at New Market, VA, to provide the controlled airspace
required to support the new RNAV GPS standard instrument approach
procedures developed for New Market Airport. This action is necessary
for the safety and management of IFR operations at the airport. This
action also adjusts the geographic coordinates of the airport to be in
concert with the FAA's aeronautical database.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes controlled airspace at New Market Airport, New
Market, VA.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 9, 2011, effective September 15, 2011, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AEA VA E5 New Market, VA [New]

New Market Airport, VA
    (Lat. 38[deg]39'22'' N., long. 78[deg]42'31'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 14.8-mile radius of New Market Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on October 4, 2011.
Mark D. Ward,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2011-26469 Filed 10-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 42 (Friday, March 2, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8937-8938]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04250]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2018-0031]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Curtis Creek, Baltimore, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the CSX Swing Bridge which carries CSX
railroad across the Curtis Creek, mile 1.4, at Baltimore, MD. The
deviation is necessary to facilitate bridge maintenance. This deviation
allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position.

DATES: The deviation is effective from 8 a.m. on Monday, March 5, 2018,
through 2:30 p.m. on Friday, March 30, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2018-0031] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH''. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Michael Thorogood, Bridge
Administration Branch Fifth District, Coast Guard, telephone 757-398-
6557, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CSX Corporation, owner and operator of
the CSX Swing Bridge that carries CSX railroad across the Curtis Creek,
mile 1.4, at Baltimore, MD, has requested a temporary deviation from
the current operating schedule to facilitate installation of railroad
ties across the swing span of the drawbridge. The bridge has a vertical
clearance of 13 feet above mean high water in the closed position and
unlimited vertical clearance in the open position. The current
operating schedule is set out in 33 CFR 117.5. Under this temporary
deviation, the bridge will remain in the closed-to-navigation position
from 8 a.m. to 2:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, March 5, 2018, through
March 30, 2018.
    Curtis Creek is used by a variety of vessels including U.S.
government and public vessels, tug and barge traffic, and recreational
vessels. The Coast Guard has carefully coordinated the restrictions
with waterway users in publishing this temporary deviation.
    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed-to-navigation
position may do so at any time. The bridge will open on signal, if at
least one hour notification is given. The bridge will be able to open
for emergencies, if at least 15 minutes notification is given. The
bridge may be contacted at<PHONE_NUMBER> 24 hours per day. There is no
immediate alternative route for vessels unable to pass through the
bridge in the closed position. The Coast Guard will also inform the
users of the waterway through our Local Notice and Broadcast Notices to
Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that
vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact
caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: February 26, 2018.
Hal R. Pitts,
Bridge Program Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2018-04250 Filed 3-1-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


material practicable, and to provide documented findings and
recommendations to USACE on these points so that the USACE and the EPA
can consider the LIS RDT's recommendations. The LIS RDT should review
the alternatives analysis for all projects submitted to help ensure
that available alternatives as described in the DMMP for each harbor
and dredging center have been thoroughly evaluated and are implemented
where practicable. While the LIS RDT will conduct project reviews and
make submissions and recommendations to the USACE, the LIS RDT will not
supplant the regulatory obligations or authorities of participant
agencies under the MPRSA, CWA, CZMA or other applicable laws.
    Other purposes of the LIS RDT include: Serving as a forum for
continuing exploration of new beneficial use alternatives to open-water
disposal; promoting the use of such alternatives; and suggesting
approaches for cost-sharing opportunities. For example, the LIS RDT
could further investigate and develop opportunities for approving and
funding long-term regional Confined Disposal Facilities which could
accommodate suitable and unsuitable dredged material and provide
environmental and social benefits such as parkland and habitat once
filled and closed.
    The LIS RDT and its member agencies should also assist USACE and
EPA in continuing a number of long term activities to continue the
environmentally sound implementation of dredging and dredged material
management in Long Island Sound. These activities include supporting
USACE's dredged material tracking system, supporting USACE's DAMOS
(Disposal Area Monitoring System) program and related efforts to study
the long-term impacts of open-water placement, and promoting
opportunities for beneficial use of clean, parent marine sediments
often generated in the development of CAD cells.
2. Geographic Scope
    The geographic range of the LIS RDT will include all of Long Island
Sound and adjacent waters landward of the seaward edge of the
territorial sea (three mile limit) or, in other words, from Throgs Neck
to a line three miles east of the baseline across western Block Island
Sound. These boundaries would encompass all harbors and areas included
in the DMMP except Block Island. The WLDS, CLDS, and ELDS would all be
within the RDT's purview.
3. Membership
    The LIS RDT should include representatives from affected federal
and state government organizations. EPA anticipates that federal
participation would include EPA Regions 1 & 2; the New England and New
York Districts and the North Atlantic Division of the USACE and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. EPA encourages the
participation of the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Fish
& Wildlife Service. EPA expects that the states of Connecticut, New
York and Rhode Island would be participants through their environmental
agencies, coastal zone management programs and relevant port
authorities. EPA requests that, to the extent possible, member
organizations will provide sufficient funding to enable their active
participation in the LIS RDT.
4. Structure and Process
    EPA proposes that the specific details for structure (e.g., chair,
committees, working groups) and process (e.g., how projects come before
the LIS RDT, coordination with other entities) be left for the LIS RDT
to determine and allowed to evolve as best accomplishes the team's
purpose.
    The LIS RDT is encouraged to establish and maintain cooperative
working relationships with other Long Island Sound-based organizations
(e.g., the Long Island Sound Study's Science and Technical Advisory
Committee, non-governmental organizations, relevant university-based
programs) so that relevant scientific, program and policy information
is effectively shared and resources are leveraged to the maximum
extent.

VII. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing this rule to designate the ELDS for the purpose of
providing an environmentally sound, open-water disposal option for
possible use in managing dredged material from harbors and navigation
channels in eastern Long Island Sound and its vicinity in the states of
Connecticut, New York, and Rhode Island. Without this dredged material
disposal site designation, there will be no open-water disposal site
available in the eastern region of Long Island Sound after December 23,
2016. In developing the DMMP, described previously in several sections,
the USACE conducted a ``dredging needs'' assessment that estimated that
a total volume of 22.6 mcy of dredged material that from the eastern
region of Long Island Sound over the 30-year planning horizon.
    The site designation process has been conducted consistent with the
requirements of the MPRSA, CWA, NEPA, CZMA, and other applicable
federal and state statutes and regulations. The basis for this federal
action is further described in a DSEIS that identifies EPA designation
of the ELDS as the preferred alternative. The DSEIS also is being
released for public comment in conjunction with the publication of this
proposed rule. Upon completion of the public comment period and EPA's
consideration of all comments received, EPA will publish a final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) specifying a
preferred alternative, and a final rule that will serve as EPA's Record
of Decision (ROD) in the NEPA process.
    The ELDS is subject to management and monitoring protocols to
prevent the occurrence of unacceptable adverse environmental impacts.
These protocols are spelled out in a SMMP for the site. The SMMP is
included as Appendix I to the DSEIS. Under 40 CFR 228.3(b), the
Regional Administrator of EPA Region 1 is responsible for the overall
management of this site. As previously explained, the designation of
these disposal sites does not constitute or imply EPA's approval of
open-water disposal at either site of dredged material from any
specific project. Disposal of dredged material will not be

allowed at the ELDS until the proposed disposal operation first
receives proper authorization from the USACE under MPRSA section 103.
In addition, any such authorization by the Corps is subject to EPA
review under MPRSA section 103(c), and EPA may condition or ``veto''
the authorization as a result of such review in accordance with MPRSA
section 103(c). In order to properly obtain authorization to dispose of
dredged material at the ELDS disposal site under the MPRSA, the dredged
material proposed for disposal must first satisfy the applicable
criteria for testing and evaluating dredged material specified in EPA
regulations at 40 CFR part 227, and it must be determined in accordance
with EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 227, subpart C, that there is a
need for open-water disposal (i.e., that there is no practicable
dredged material management alternative to open-water disposal with
less adverse environmental impact). In addition, any proposal to
dispose of dredged material under the MPRSA at the designated site will
need to satisfy all the site Restrictions included in the final rule as
part of the site designations. See 40 CFR 228.8 and 228.15(b)(6).

VIII. Supporting Documents

    1. EPA Region 1/USACE NAE. 2005. Response to Comments on the Final
Environmental Impact Statement for the Designation of Dredged Material
Disposal Sites in Central and Western Long Island Sound, Connecticut
and New York. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Boston,
MA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Concord, MA.
April 2005.
    2. EPA Region 1. 2005. Memorandum to the File Responding to the
Letter from the New York Department of State Objecting to EPA's Federal
Consistency Determination for the Dredged Material Disposal Site
Designations. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Boston,
MA. May 2005.
    3. EPA Region 1/USACE NAE. 2004. Final Environmental Impact
Statement for the Designation of Dredged Material Disposal Sites in
Central and Western Long Island Sound, Connecticut and New York. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Boston, MA and U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, New England District, Concord, MA. March 2004.
    4. EPA Region 1/USACE NAE. 2004. Regional Implementation Manual for
the Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Disposal in New England
Waters. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Boston, MA, and
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Concord, MA. April
2004.
    5. EPA Region 2/USACE NAN. 1992. Guidance for Performing Tests on
Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 2, New York, NY and U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, New York District, New York, NY. Draft Release. December
1992.
    6. EPA/USACE. 1991. Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for
Ocean Disposal-Testing Manual. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC. EPA-
503/8-91/001. February 1991.
    7. Long Island Sound Study. 2015. Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plan for Long Island Sound. Long Island Sound Management
Conference. September 2015.
    8. NY DEC and CT DEP. 2000. A total maximum daily load analysis to
achieve water quality standards for dissolved oxygen in Long Island
Sound. Prepared in conformance with section 303(d) of the Clean Water
Act and the Long Island Sound Study. New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY and Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection, Hartford, CT. December 2000.
    9. USACE NAE. 2016. Final Long Island Sound Dredged Material
Management Plan and Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement--
Connecticut, Rhode Island and New York. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
New England District. December 2015.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

1. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action, as defined in
the Executive Order, and was therefore not submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review.

2. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because it would not require persons to obtain, maintain,
retain, report or publicly disclose information to or for a federal
agency.

3. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA). The amended restrictions in this proposed rule are only
relevant for dredged material disposal projects subject to the MPRSA.
Non-federal projects involving 25,000 cubic yards or less of material
are not subject to the MPRSA and, instead, are regulated under CWA
section 404. This action will, therefore, have no effect on such
projects. ``Small entities'' under the RFA are most likely to be
involved with smaller projects not covered by the MPRSA. Therefore, EPA
does not believe a substantial number of small entities will be
affected by today's rule. Furthermore, the proposed amendments to the
restrictions also will not have significant economic impacts on a
substantial number of small entities because they primarily will create
requirements to be followed by regulatory agencies rather than small
entities, and will create requirements (i.e., the standards and
procedures) intended to help ensure satisfaction of the existing
regulatory requirement (see 40 CFR 227.16) that practicable
alternatives to the ocean dumping of dredged material be utilized.

4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments or the private sector.

5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects 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. Through
the RDT process, however, this action will provide a vehicle for
facilitating the interaction and communication of interested federal
and state agencies concerned with regulating dredged material disposal
in Long Island Sound.

6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175 because the proposed restrictions will not have
substantial direct effects on Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the federal government and Indian Tribes, or the distribution
of power and responsibilities between the federal government and Indian
Tribes. EPA consulted with the potentially affected

Indian tribes in making this determination.

7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children.

8. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

9. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

10. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or
indigenous populations.

11. Executive Order 13158: Marine Protected Areas

    Executive Order 13158 (65 FR 34909, May 31, 2000) requires EPA to
``expeditiously propose new science-based regulations, as necessary, to
ensure appropriate levels of protection for the marine environment.''
EPA may take action to enhance or expand protection of existing marine
protected areas and to establish or recommend, as appropriate, new
marine protected areas. The purpose of the Executive Order is to
protect the significant natural and cultural resources within the
marine environment, which means, ''those areas of coastal and ocean
waters, the Great Lakes and their connecting waters, and submerged
lands thereunder, over which the United States exercises jurisdiction,
consistent with international law.''
    The EPA expects that this proposed rule will afford additional
protection to the waters of Long Island Sound and organisms that
inhabit them. Building on the existing protections of the MPRSA and the
ocean dumping regulations, the proposed regulatory amendments are
designed to promote the reduction of open-water disposal of dredged
material in Long Island Sound.

12. Executive Order 13547: Stewardship of the Ocean, Our Coasts, and
the Great Lakes

    Section 6(a)(i) of Executive Order 13547, (75 FR 43023, July 19,
2010) requires, among other things, EPA and certain other agencies ``.
. . to the fullest extent consistent with applicable law [to] . . .
take such action as necessary to implement the policy set forth in
section 2 of this order and the stewardship principles and national
priority objectives as set forth in the Final Recommendations and
subsequent guidance from the Council.'' The policies in section 2 of
Executive Order 13547 include, among other things, the following: ``. .
. it is the policy of the United States to: (i) protect, maintain, and
restore the health and biological diversity of ocean, coastal, and
Great Lakes ecosystems and resources; [and] (ii) improve the resiliency
of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems, communities, and
economies . . ..'' As with Executive Order 13158 (Marine Protected
Areas), the overall purpose of the Executive Order is to promote
protection of ocean and coastal environmental resources.
    The EPA expects that this proposed rule will afford additional
protection to the waters of Long Island Sound and the organisms that
inhabit them. Building on the existing protections of the MPRSA and the
ocean dumping regulations, the proposed regulatory amendments are
designed to promote the reduction or elimination of open-water disposal
of dredged material in Long Island Sound.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228

    Environmental protection, Water pollution control.

    Dated: April 18, 2016.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1--New England.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, Chapter I, of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as set forth
below.

PART 228--CRITERIA FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF DISPOSAL SITES FOR OCEAN
DUMPING

0
1. The authority citation for part 228 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.

0
2. Section 228.15(b) is amended by revising paragraph (b)(4)(vi)
introductory text and adding paragraph (b)(6) to read as follows:

Sec.  228.15  Dumping sites designated on a final basis.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (vi) Restrictions: The designation in this paragraph (b)(4) sets
forth conditions for the use of the Central Long Island Sound (CLDS),
Western Long Island Sound (WLDS) and Eastern Long Island Sound (ELDS)
Dredged Material Disposal Sites. These conditions apply to all disposal
subject to the MPRSA, namely, all federal projects and nonfederal
projects greater than 25,000 cubic yards. All references to''
permittees'' shall be deemed to include the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) when it is authorizing its own dredged material
disposal from a USACE dredging project. The conditions for this
designation are as follows:
* * * * *
    (6) Eastern Long Island Sound Dredged Material Disposal Site
(ELDS).
    (i) Location: Corner Coordinates (NAD 1983) 41[deg]15.81' N.,
72[deg]04.57' W.; 41[deg]16.81' N., 72[deg]04.57' W.; 41[deg]16.81' N.,
72[deg]07.22' W.; 41[deg]15.81' N., 72[deg]07.22' W.
    (ii) Size: A 2 by 1 nautical mile rectangular area, a size of 2
square nautical miles (nmi\2\).
    (iii) Depth: Ranges from 45 to 100 feet (14m to 30m).
    (iv) Primary use: Dredged material disposal.
    (v) Period of use: Continuing use.
    (vi) Restrictions: See 40 CFR 228.15(b)(4)(vi)(A) through (N).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-09603 Filed 4-26-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 134 (Friday, July 12, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41975-41979]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16680]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0030]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 32 individuals
for exemption from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in
one eye for various reasons. The exemptions will enable these
individuals to operate commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate
commerce without meeting the prescribed vision requirement in one eye.
If granted, the exemptions would enable these individuals to qualify as
drivers of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 12, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0030 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: 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 numbers for this notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    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 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 Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on January
17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).

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 grant an exemption
from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for a 2-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.'' FMCSA can renew exemptions at the end of each
2-year period. The 32 individuals listed in this notice have each
requested such an exemption from the vision requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), which applies to drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce.
Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications of each
applicant to determine whether granting an exemption will achieve the
required level of safety mandated by statute.

Qualifications of Applicants

Steven L. Albert

    Mr. Albert, age 46, has had aphakia in his right eye since 1991.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in his left eye, 20/
20. Following an examination in 2012, his ophthalmologist noted, ``His
vision is sufficient to perform driving tasks to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Albert reported that he has driven straight trucks for
15.5 years, accumulating 69,750 miles. He holds an operator's license
from Pennsylvania. His driving record for the last 3 years shows two
crashes for which he was cited and no additional convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Manassah E. Baker

    Mr. Baker, 60, has had a prosthetic right eye since 1977. The
visual acuity in his right eye is no light perception, and in his left
eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2012, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``The patient has sufficient vision to perform driving tasks
that are required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Baker reported
that he has driven straight trucks for 9 months, accumulating 15,588
miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 42 years, accumulating 4.2
million miles. He holds a Class A Commercial Driver's License (CDL)
from Florida. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Carl H. Block

    Mr. Block, 44, has had a central retinal artery occlusion in his
right eye since 2009. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and
in his left eye, 20/15. Following an examination in 2012, his
ophthalmologist noted, ``It is my medical opinion that Mr. Block has
sufficient vision to perform the driving

tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Block reported
that he has driven straight trucks for 14 years, accumulating 84,000
miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 10 years, accumulating
20,000 miles. He holds a Class AM CDL from New York. His driving record
for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Christopher W. Brim

    Mr. Brim, 26, has had a prosthetic right eye since childhood. The
visual acuity in his right eye is no light perception, and in his left
eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``I feel he has sufficient vision to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Brim reported that he has driven straight trucks for 4.5
years, accumulating 79,799 miles. He holds an operator's license from
Tennessee. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

John W. Camp

    Mr. Camp, 52, has had strabismic amblyopia in his left eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left
eye, 20/250. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted,
``In my medical opinion, I feel M. John Camp [sic] had sufficient
vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Camp reported that he has driven tractor-trailer
combinations for 30 years, accumulating 4.5 million miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from Georgia. His driving record for the last 3 years shows
no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Ralph Carr

    Mr. Carr, 55, has had amblyopia in his right eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in his left eye, 20/
20. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``I
certify that Ralph Carr has sufficient vision to operate a commercial
vehicle according to current standards.'' Mr. Carr reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 34 years, accumulating 397,800 miles. He
holds a Class AM CDL from Pennsylvania. His driving record for the last
3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Juan Carranco

    Mr. Carranco, 56, has had refractive amblyopia in his left eye
since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/25, and in
his left eye, 20/100. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist
noted, ``My opinion is that Mr. Carranco has sufficient vision to
perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle and
should be considered for a Federal Vision Exemption through the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration.'' Mr. Carranco reported that he
has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 37 years, accumulating 2.2
million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Texas. His driving record
for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

William Chisley

    Mr. Chisley, 32, has had refractive amblyopia in his right eye
since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in
his left eye, 20/25. Following an examination in 2012, his optometrist
noted, ``Examination today reveals that Mr. Chisley has sufficient
vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Chisley reported that he has driven straight trucks for
5 years, accumulating 2400 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Maryland.
His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Westcott G. Clarke

    Mr. Clarke, 63, has had optic neuropathy in his left eye since
2003. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye,
20/200. Following an examination in 2012, his optometrist noted, ``It
is my opinion that Mr. Clarke functions very well visually to operate
commercial vehicles on public roads. He is corrected to 20/20 and is
quite able to perform required driving tasks.'' Mr. Clarke reported
that he has driven straight trucks for 40 years, accumulating 600,000
miles. He holds an operator's license from Massachusetts. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

Jerrald A. Crabtree

    Mr. Crabtree, 39, has had complete loss of vision in his left eye
since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in
his left eye, counting fingers. Following an examination in 2013, his
optometrist noted, ``In my professional opinion, Mr. Crabtree has
sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Crabtree reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 19 years, accumulating 950,000 miles. He holds a Class B CDL
from Washington. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no
crashes and one conviction for a moving violation in a CMV; he exceeded
the speed limit by 15 mph.

John A. Dilts

    Mr. Dilts, 62, has had anisometropic amblyopia in his right eye
since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/60, and in
his left eye, 20/15. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist
noted, ``In my professional opinion, Mr. Dilts does have sufficient
vision to perform the driving tasks that would be required to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Dilts reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 40 years, accumulating 330,000 miles. He holds a Class B CDL
from Indiana. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Phyllis Dodson

    Ms. Dodson, 55, has had amblyopia in her right eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in her right eye is counting fingers, and in her left
eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2012, her optometrist noted,
``I certify that in my medical opinion, Ms. Dodson has sufficient
vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Ms. Dodson reported that she has driven buses for 18 years,
accumulating 576,000 miles. She holds a Class B CDL from Indiana. Her
driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions
for moving violations in a CMV.

Donnie H. Eagle

    Mr. Eagle, 60, has had amblyopia in his left eye since birth. The
visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/200.
Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``It is my
medical opinion that Mr. Eagle has sufficient vision to perform the
driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Eagle
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 37 years, accumulating
370,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 37 years,
accumulating 3.7 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from West
Virginia. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Phillip L. Ergovich

    Mr. Ergovich, 60, has had a toxoplasmosis scar in his right eye
since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in
his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist
noted, ``In my medical opinion, he has sufficient vision to

perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.''
Mr. Ergovich reported that he has driven straight trucks for 16 years,
accumulating 624,000 miles. He holds an operator's license from
Missouri. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Udum Khamsoksavath

    Mr. Khamsoksavath, 38, has had complete loss of vision in his right
eye since birth. The visual acuity in his right eye is no light
perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in
2013, his optometrist noted, ``Based on his ability to compensate for
his vision loss and his overall visual field in his left eye, he meets
the DOT requirements. I certify he meets the requirements to drive a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Khamsoksavath reported that he has driven
tractor-trailer combinations for 7 years, accumulating 350,000 miles.
He holds a Class A CDL from Washington. His driving record for the last
3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Michael A. Lancette

    Mr. Lancette, 63, has had amblyopia in his right eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/400, and in his
left eye, 20/25. Following an examination in 2013, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``In my opinion, Mr. Lancette has sufficient vision to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Lancette reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 40 years, accumulating 4 million miles, and tractor-trailer
combinations for 20 years, accumulating 2.5 million miles. He holds a
Class ABCD CDL from Wisconsin. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Alex P. Makhanov

    Mr. Makhanov, 25, has had amblyopia in his left eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left
eye, 20/70. Following an examination in 2012, his optometrist noted,
``I certify, in my opinion, that Alex has sufficient vision to perform
driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Makhanov
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 3 years, accumulating
24,000 miles. He holds a Class B CDL from Washington. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

Mitchell Malcolm

    Mr. Malcolm, 58, has had a retinal detachment in his left eye since
1985. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye,
counting fingers. Following an examination in 2012, his optometrist
noted, ``In my medical opinion, Mr. Malcolm would have sufficient
vision to perform driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Malcolm reported that he has driven straight trucks for
42 years, accumulating 42,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations
for 19 years, accumulating 95,000 miles. He holds an operator's license
from Minnesota. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no
crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Vincent E. Marsee, Sr.

    Mr. Marsee, 55, has had a corneal scar in his left eye since 1979.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/
60. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``Has
sufficient vision to drive commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Marsee reported
that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 13 years,
accumulating 1.3 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from North
Carolina. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Phillip P. Mazza

    Mr. Mazza, 40, has had a retinal scar in his right eye since 1993.
The visual acuity in his right eye is counting fingers, and in his left
eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted,
``It is my professional opinion that Mr. Mazza's vision is more than
sufficient to perform the driving tasks required to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Mazza reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 20 years, accumulating 300,000 miles, and tractor-trailer
combinations for 18 years, accumulating 144,000 miles. He holds a Class
A CDL from Pennsylvania. His driving record for the last 3 years shows
no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Brandin D. Meester

    Mr. Meester, 28, has had amblyopia in his left eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/
200. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``In my
opinion this patient has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Meester reported that
he has driven straight trucks for 3 years, accumulating 180,000 miles.
He holds an operator's license from North Dakota. His driving record
for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Charles Moen

    Mr. Moen, 57, has had optic neuropathy in his left eye since 2008.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/25, and in his left eye, 20/
60. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``Patient
has sufficient vision to perform driving tasks required to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Moen reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 5 years, accumulating 100,000 miles, and tractor-trailer
combinations for 29 years, accumulating 3.2 million miles. He holds a
Class CA CDL from Michigan. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Jerome M. Paintner

    Mr. Paintner, 60, has had strabismic amblyopia in his right eye
since birth. The visual acuity in his right eye is light perception,
and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his
optometrist noted, ``In my medical opinion, Mr. Paintner has sufficient
vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Paintner reported that he has driven straight trucks for
15 years, accumulating 45,000 miles. He holds an operator's license
from North Dakota. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no
crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Louis A. Pence

    Mr. Pence, 64, has had a corneal scar in his right eye since 2007.
The visual acuity in his right eye is light perception, and in his left
eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted,
``I believe that Louis Pence has sufficient vision to perform driving
tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Pence reported
that he has driven straight trucks for 20 years, accumulating 600,000
miles. He holds an operator's license from Wyoming. His driving record
for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Jeffrey T. Sanders

    Mr. Sanders, 45, has had refractive amblyopia in his left eye since
2002. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye,
20/200. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``He
has a full field of vision in both eyes 160 degrees horizontally. His
color vision is within

normal limits and he is approved to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr.
Sanders reported that he has driven straight trucks for 7 years,
accumulating 182,000 miles. He holds an operator's license from North
Carolina. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Michael Schott

    Mr. Schott, 63, has had amblyopia in his right eye since birth. The
visual acuity in his right eye is 20/300, and in his left eye, 20/20.
Following an examination in 2013, his ophthalmologist noted, ``In my
opinion, Mike has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Schott reported that he
has driven straight trucks for 4 years, accumulating 200,000 miles, and
tractor-trailer combinations for 28 years, accumulating 2.2 million
miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Nebraska. His driving record for the
last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations
in a CMV.

Steven C. Sheeder

    Mr. Sheeder, 55, has had complete loss of vision in his left eye
since 1990. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20. Following an
examination in 2012, his optometrist noted, ``He has excellent vision
and should have no problems operating a commercial vehicle.'' Mr.
Sheeder reported that he has driven straight trucks for 36 years,
accumulating 360,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 36
years, accumulating 7.2 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from
Iowa. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes.

Larry C. Smoot, Jr.

    Mr. Smoot, 37, has had a traumatic cataract in his right eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is light perception, and
in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his
optometrist noted, ``In my professional opinion, Mr. Larry Smoot Jr.
has sufficient vision to drive and operate commercial vehicle.'' Mr.
Smoot reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 17
years, accumulating 1.2 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from
California. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and one conviction for a moving violation in a CMV; he exceeded the
speed limit.

David Snellings

    Mr. Snellings, 63, has had a macular pucker in his left eye since
2011. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye,
20/50. Following an examination in 2013, his ophthalmologist noted,
``In my medical opinion, I do believe Mr. Snellings has sufficient
vision to perform his driving tasks of operating a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Snellings reported that he has driven tractor-trailer
combinations for 40 years, accumulating 4 million miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from Maryland. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Edward A. Spakousky

    Mr. Spakousky, 51, has had amblyopia in his right eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/70, and in his left
eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted,
``I believe that Edward does have sufficient vision to perform the
driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.''
    Mr. Spakousky reported that he has driven straight trucks for 13
years, accumulating 6,500 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for
13 years, accumulating 780,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from
Oregon. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Jose L. Torres-Perales

    Mr. Torres-Perales, 44, has had a cataract in his left eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left
eye, light perception. Following an examination in 2012, his
optometrist noted, ``I see no reason that Mr. Torres' vision should
limit his safety while operating a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Torres-
Perales reported that he has driven straight trucks for 12 years,
accumulating 288,000 miles. He holds an operator's license from Kansas.
His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and one
conviction for a moving violation in a CMV; he exceeded the speed limit
by 15 mph.

Adam J. Zappetta

    Mr. Zappetta, 33, has had coloboma in his left eye since 2010. The
visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/50.
Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``All current
testing confirms he can meet the visual demands required by the
department of transportation to operate a commercial vehicle. It is my
opinion that Mr. Zappetta should wear corrective lenses while driving
commercial vehicles.''
    Mr. Zappetta reported that he has driven buses for 9 years,
accumulating 27,000 miles. He holds an operator's license from
Wisconsin. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. The Agency will consider all comments
received before the close of business August 12, 2013. Comments will be
available for examination in the docket at the location listed under
the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Agency will file comments
received after the comment closing date in the public docket, and will
consider them to the extent practicable.
    In addition to late comments, FMCSA will also continue to file, in
the public docket, relevant information that becomes available after
the comment closing date. Interested persons should monitor the public
docket for new material.

Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket number FMCSA-2013-0030 and click
the search button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue
``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand side of the page. On the new
page, enter information required including the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of
the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number
FMCSA-2013-0030 and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket
Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments related to the
proposed rulemaking.

    Issued On: July 8, 2013.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-16680 Filed 7-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: September 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 177)]
[Notices]
[Page 52897]
[DOCID:fr11se08-104]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of
Directors

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

Time and Date:  October 9, 2008, 12 noon to 3 p.m., Eastern Daylight
Time.

Place:  This meeting will take place telephonically. Any interested
person may call Mr. Avelino Gutierrez at<PHONE_NUMBER> to receive the
toll free number and pass code needed to participate in these meetings
by telephone.

Status:  Open to the public.

Matters to be Considered:  The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board
of Directors (the Board) will continue its work in developing and
implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement and to
that end, may consider matters properly before the Board.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Avelino Gutierrez, Chair, Unified
Carrier Registration Board of Directors at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 9, 2008.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E8-21324 Filed 9-9-08; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P