[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 18, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47232-47234]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20194]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84099; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2018-64]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify the NYSE
Arca Options Fee Schedule

September 12, 2018.
    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 August 29, 2018, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the 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 proposes to modify the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule
(``Fee Schedule''). The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change
effective September 1, 2018. The proposed rule change is available on
the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at

the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to modify the Fee Schedule, effective
September 1, 2018, to modify the existing Floor Broker rebate for
executed Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') orders,\4\ and to adjust
the Firm and Broker Dealer Monthly Fee Cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The QCC permits an OTP Holder or OTP Firm to effect a
qualified contingent trade (``QCT'') in a Regulation NMS stock and
cross the options leg of the trade on the Exchange immediately upon
entry and without order exposure if the order is for at least 1,000
contracts, is part of a QCT, is executed at a price at least equal
to the national best bid or offer, as long as there are no Customer
orders in the Exchange's Consolidated Book at the same price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Exchange offers a Floor Brokers Rebate of $0.035 per
contract side for QCC trades executed on behalf of non-Customers.\5\
The Exchange also offers a Firm and Broker Dealer Monthly Fee Cap (the
``Fee Cap'') which caps fees at $100,000 for Manual (Open Outcry)
Executions and, for QCC transactions executed by a Floor Broker from
the Floor of the Exchange, for Firm and Broker Dealer transactions
cleared in the customer range.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Fee Schedule, QUALIFIED CONTINGENT CROSS TRANSACTION
FEES, available here,https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/arca-options/NYSE_Arca_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf.
    \6\ The Fee Cap excludes fees for Strategy Executions, Royalty
Fees and firm trades executed via a Joint Back Office agreement. See
id. FIRM AND BROKER DEALER MONTHLY FEE CAP. The Exchange also offers
a lesser cap on fees for those OTP Holders and OTP Firms that
achieve certain Tiers of the Customer Penny Pilot Posting Credit
Tiers. See id., FIRM AND BROKER DEALER MONTHLY FIRM CAP TIERS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to replace the existing Floor Broker Rebate
with a two-tiered credit. As proposed, the first tier would provide a
$0.07 per contract credit for ``Floor Brokers executing 300,000 or
fewer contracts in a month,'' which tier would effectively replace the
current $0.035 ``Floor Broker Rebate for Executed Orders--Per Contract
Side.'' \7\ The Exchange proposes to introduce a second tier that would
enable Floor Brokers to earn a higher credit--of $0.10--for executed
QCC transactions in excess of 300,000 contracts.\8\ The proposed
credits would be paid solely on the volume executed to achieve each
tier and is not retroactive to the first contract.\9\ For example, if a
Floor Broker executes 400,000 QCC contracts in a given month, the Floor
Broker would receive the $0.07 per contract for the first 300,000 QCC
transactions and $0.10 per contract for the remaining 100,000
contracts. As with the existing Floor Broker Rebate, Customer-to-
Customer QCC trades would not qualify for any credit as such
transactions net the Exchange no revenue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange also proposes to make a number of textual
changes to the table regarding QCC transactions. Specifically, the
Exchange proposes to revise the title of the table to reflect the
shorthand ``QCC'' and that the table includes fees ``and credits'';
to revise the column headings to ``Participant'' and ``Per Contract
Fee or Credit''; to remove reference to ``per side'' with respect to
QCC fees as fees/credits are based on participant type executing
such contracts; and to remove the term ``Rebate'' as the Floor
Brokers are actually given a credit against fees incurred. See
proposed Fee Schedule, QUALIFIED CONTINGENT CROSS (``QCC'')
TRANSACTION FEES AND CREDITS and Endnote 13. The Exchange believes
these technical changes would add clarity and transparency to the
Fee Schedule.
    \8\ See id. (including reference to Endnote 13 in proposed tier,
consistent with the current schedule for QCCs). See Fee Schedule,
Endnote 13 supra n. 5 (providing that the Floor Broker credit does
not apply to QCC executions in which a Customer is on both sides of
the QCC and capping the potential monthly credit at $375,000 per
Floor Broker firm).
    \9\ See id., Endnote 13 (providing, in relevant part, ``[t]he
Floor Broker credit is paid only on volume within the applicable
tier and is not retroactive to the first contract traded'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that the proposed credit for Floor Brokers is
consistent with such credits offered for QCC volumes across the
industry. Specifically, the Nasdaq OMX PHLX (``PHLX'') and Nasdaq ISE
(``ISE'') pay volume-based rebates for QCC volume that range from $0.00
to $0.11 per contract.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See PHLX Pricing Schedule, available here, http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Micro.aspx?id=phlxpricing; and ISE Schedule of
Fees, available here, http://ise.cchwallstreet.com/tools/PlatformViewer.asp?selectednode=chp_1_1_5&manual=%2Fcontents%2Fise%2Fise-fee%2F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to adopt an incremental service fee of
$0.01 per contract for Firm or Broker Dealer Manual transactions once
an OTP Holder or OTP Firm has reached the applicable Fee Cap. The
incremental service fee would not apply to the execution of a QCC
order. The Exchange notes that this proposed fee is competitive as it
is consistent with the incremental service fee that NYSE American
imposes once firms have reached a similar monthly fee cap on that
exchange.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See NYSE American Options Fee Schedule, Section I.I., Firm
Monthly Fee Cap, available here, https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/american-options/NYSE_American_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf
(providing that ``[o]nce a Firm has reached the Firm Monthly Fee
Cap, an incremental service fee of $0.01 per contract for Firm
Manual transactions will apply, except for the execution of a QCC
order, in which case there is no incremental service fee''). The
Exchange notes that the fee cap on NYSE American applies only to
``Firms,'' whereas the NYSE Arca Fee Cap applies to both Firms and
Broker Dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act, in general, and furthers the objectives
of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act, in particular, because it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its
facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed tiered Floor Broker credits
for QCC volume rebates are reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the credits are designed to attract more QCC
volume to the Exchange. To the extent that the credits attract
additional order flow to the Exchange, all market participants should
benefit. Market participants may engage Floor Brokers to entrust them
with their QCC orders and, given the credit that a Floor Broker may
receive, such market participants may negotiate the appropriate fee for
such order flow.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed credits are equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory because they would apply to all Floor
Brokers that execute QCC orders on the Exchange on an equal and non-
discriminatory basis. Moreover, the Exchange notes that the proposed
credits are consistent with credits offered by other options exchanges.
Specifically, PHLX and ISE pay volume-based rebates for QCC volume that
range from $0.00 to $0.11 per contract.\12\
    The Exchange believes that the proposed textual changes to the
Floor Broker credit (see supra n. 7) would add clarity, transparency
and internal consistency to the Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See supra n. 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that adopting the proposed incremental
service fee once a firm reaches the Fee Cap is

reasonable because it would allow the Exchange to recoup the costs
incurred in providing certain services, including but not limited to
trade matching and processing, post trade allocation, submission for
clearing and customer service activities related to trading activity on
the Exchange. In this regard, the Exchanges notes that the proposed fee
is consistent with similarly such incremental fees charged on other
options exchanges in connection with similar fee caps and is therefore
competitive.\13\ Finally, the Exchange believes the proposal to adopt
the service fee is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it
would uniformly apply to all member firms engaged in manual proprietary
trading that have reached the Fee Cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra n. 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change would allow Floor
Brokers to better compete for QCC volumes as the credits are consistent
with those paid to participants on other exchanges.\14\ The Exchange
also believes that the proposed service fee is likewise competitive as
it would allow the Exchange to recoup certain costs incurred in
providing services to member firms and is consistent with similar such
fees charged by other exchanges that offer a similar monthly fee
cap.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra n. 10.
    \15\ See supra n. 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily favor competing venues. In
such an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider
adjusting, its fees and credits to remain competitive with other
exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment.

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 foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \16\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \17\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \18\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2018-64 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2018-64. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2018-64 and should be submitted
on or before October 9, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2018-20194 Filed 9-17-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 73063]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28762]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL15-23-000]

Exelon Corporation and Calpine Cooperation (Complainants) v. ISO
New England Inc., (Respondent); Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on November 26, 2014, pursuant to Rule 206 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice
and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 and sections 206 and 306 of the Federal
Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824, 824(e), and 825(e), Exelon Corporation and
Calpine Corporation (collectively, Complainants) filed a formal
complaint against ISO New England Inc. (ISO-NE or Respondent), alleging
that ISO-NE's Transmission, Markets & Services Tariff (Tariff) is
unjust, unreasonable and unduly discriminatory because of the price
suppression that will result if price-taker offers are entered for
capacity from new resources who have chosen to lock-in their prices
under Section III.<IP_ADDRESS>.2.4 of the Tariff, as more fully explained
in the complaint.
    The Complainants certifies that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts for ISO-NE as listed on the Commission's list of
Corporate Officials.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
``eSubscription'' link on the Web site that enables subscribers to
receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed
docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 16, 2014.

    Dated: December 1, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-28762 Filed 12-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 143 (Thursday, July 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35041-35043]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15835]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2005-23151]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Information Collection
Revision Request--Medical Qualification Requirements, OMB Control
Number 2126-0006

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

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FMCSA
announces that it is considering submitting the Information Collection
Request (ICR) described below to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for its review and approval and invites public comment on a
revision to the Information Collection (IC) titled Medical
Qualification Requirements, covered by OMB Control Number 2126-0006,
which is currently due to expire on August 31, 2018. This revision is
due to the Agency's anticipation of a final rule to revise its
regulations to eliminate the blanket prohibition against insulin-
dependent diabetic individuals' operation of commercial motor vehicles
(CMV) in interstate commerce. The final rule is based on the Agency's
2015 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) and subsequent announcement
of the availability of recommendations provided by FMCSA's Medical
Review Board (MRB) after an analysis of the comments received in
response to the NPRM. Based on the MRB's analysis of the comments and
their recommendations, FMCSA is considering replacing the previously
proposed written notification from the treating clinician (TC) with a
form titled Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus Assessment Form to be
completed by the TC and provided to the certified medical examiner
(certified ME). This form could be required for CMV drivers treated
with insulin for diabetes who wish to drive in interstate commerce.
FMCSA invites public comment on the proposed IC revision and the form
that it is being considered.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before September 25, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket Number FMCSA-2005-23151 using any of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Services; U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
docket number. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the exemption process, see the Public
Participation heading below. 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.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the
online instructions for accessing the dockets, or go to the street
address listed above.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket Management System
published in the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or
you may visit http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdfE8-794.pdf.
    Public Participation: The Federal eRulemaking Portal is available
24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You can obtain electronic
submission and retrieval help and guidelines under the ``help'' section
of the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site. If you want us to notify
you that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed,
stamped envelope or postcard, or print the acknowledgement page that
appears after submitting comments online. Comments received after the
comment closing date will be included in the docket and will be
considered to the extent practicable.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration, West Building 6th Floor, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The primary mission of FMCSA is to reduce crashes, injuries, and
fatalities involving large trucks and buses. The Secretary of
Transportation has delegated to FMCSA its responsibility under 49
U.S.C. 31136, 31149 and 31502 to prescribe regulations that ensure that
CMVs are operated safely. As part of this mission, the Agency's Medical
Programs Division works to ensure that CMV drivers engaged in
interstate commerce are physically qualified and able to safely perform
their work.
    Information used to determine and certify driver medical fitness
must be collected for our highways to be safe. FMCSA is the Federal
government agency authorized to require the collection of this
information and the authorizing regulations are located at 49 CFR 390-
399. FMCSA is required by statute to establish standards for the
physical qualifications of drivers who operate CMVs in interstate
commerce for non-excepted industries (49 U.S.C. 31136(a)(3),
31149(c)(1)(A)(i), and 31502(b)). The regulations relevant to this
collection are outlined in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs) at 49 CFR 390-399. The FMCSRs at 49 CFR 391.41 set forth the
physical qualification standards that interstate CMV drivers who are
subject to part 391 must meet, with the exception of drivers operating
vehicles transporting migrant workers (who must meet the physical
qualification standards set forth in 49 CFR 398.3). The FMCSRs covering
driver physical qualification records are found at 49 CFR 391.43, which
specify that a medical examination be performed on CMV drivers subject
to part 391 who operate in interstate commerce. The results of the
examination must be recorded in accordance with the requirements set
forth in that section.
    Section 391.41(b)(3) states that a person is physically qualified
to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or
clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for
control. As such, drivers with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM)
are currently prohibited from driving CMVs in interstate commerce
unless they obtain an exemption from FMCSA.
    On May 4, 2015 (80 FR 25260), FMCSA published a NPRM proposing to
revise Sec.  391.41(b)(3) to permit drivers with stable, well
controlled ITDM to be

qualified to operate CMVs in interstate commerce who meet the proposed
new requirements of Sec. Sec.  391.45 and 391.46. The proposal would
enable drivers with ITDM to obtain a Medical Examiner's Certificate
(MEC), Form MCSA-5876, from a certified ME at least annually to operate
a CMV in interstate commerce if the TC provides documentation to the
certified ME that the condition is stable and well controlled.
    To assist in the development of the final rule, FMCSA requested
that the MRB, under MRB Task 15-1, review and analyze all comments from
medical professionals, labor and industry, and trade associations, and
identify factors the Agency should consider when making decisions about
the next steps in the diabetes rulemaking. In July 2015, the MRB
deliberated on these public comments for purposes of offering
recommendations to the Agency on this topic.
    In September of 2015, the MRB provided several detailed
recommendations in a final report of Task 15-1 to the Agency. In the
report, the MRB recommended that FMCSA develop a questionnaire for the
TC to send to the certified ME. See Recommendation II E, ``FMCSA
Drivers With Insulin Treated Diabetes Mellitus Assessment Form.'' In
September 2016, the Agency published a Federal Register notice
announcing the availability of and requesting comments on the MRB's
Task 15-1 recommendations. The MRB's final report for Task 15-1 and the
Federal Register notice are available in the docket for this rulemaking
(in addition to being available on the Agency's public Web site).
    The Agency evaluated the MRB's recommendations, as well as public
comments, and is considering the use of an assessment form titled
Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus Assessment Form. The Agency may
modify the form and the information that would be collected in response
to any comments received in response to this notice. The addition of
this requirement will add 33,616 annual burden hours and $2,823,744
annual salary costs. However, eliminating the Diabetes Exemption
Program as proposed in the NPRM will result in 2,219 less annual burden
hours and $68,645 less annual salary costs. Therefore, the final rule
would provide a net increase of 31,397 in annual burden hours and
$2,755,099 in salary costs from the proposed updated annual burden
hours and costs. The form that is being considered would include the
following information collected by the TC:

CMV Driver Information

1. Name
2. DOB
3. Information about the driver's use of insulin:
    a. Whether the driver is newly diagnosed or an established insulin
user
    b. Date insulin use began
    c. Whether or not the driver has been on a stable insulin regimen
for three months prior
4. Information about the driver's use of blood glucose self-monitoring
records
    a. Whether or not the driver provided documentation of ongoing
self-monitoring of blood glucose measured with an electronic glucometer
for at least the preceding three months
    b. Number of times per day the driver is testing their blood
glucose
    c. Whether or not the driver is compliant with glucose monitoring
based on his/her specific treatment plan
5. Information about insulin management and diabetes control
    a. Whether or not the driver has experienced any severe
hypoglycemic episodes within the preceding three months
    b. Whether or not the driver has experienced any severe
hypoglycemic episodes in the absence of warning symptoms in the
preceding three months
    c. Whether or not the driver has had his/her HbA1C measured
intermittently over the last 12 months with the most recent measure
within the preceding three months accompanied by a copy of the most
recent laboratory results.
6. Information about diabetes complications
    a. Whether or not the driver has any signs of diabetes
complications or target organ damage that impairs the driver's ability
to safely operate a CMV
7. Information about progressive eye diseases
    a. Date of last comprehensive dilated eye examination
    b. Whether or not the driver has been diagnosed with Stage 3 or 4
diabetic retinopathy
    c. Whether or not the driver has been diagnosed with any other
progressive eye disease(s)
8. Any comments provided by the TC

TC Information

1. Certification that they are the treating clinician for the driver
and that the driver maintains a stable insulin regimen and stable
control of his/her insulin-treated diabetes mellitus.
2. Date
3. Name
4. Signature
5. Telephone Number
6. Email address
7. Street Address
8. City, State, and Zip Code

    The public interest in, and the right to have, safe highways
requires the assurance that drivers of CMVs can safely perform the
increased physical and mental demands of their duties. FMCSA's medical
standards provide this assurance by requiring drivers to be examined
and medically certified as physically and mentally qualified to drive a
CMV.
    Therefore, the information collected on this assessment form could
assist the certified ME in determining if the driver with ITDM that is
being examined is medically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41 to operate a
CMV, and to ensure that there are no medical conditions that could
adversely affect his or her ability to drive safely or cause
incapacitation constituting a risk to the public.
    The use of this form could allow the certified ME to have
communication with TCs so that the certified ME fully understands
whether the driver with ITDM that is being examined has stable, well-
controlled diabetes. This information will assist the ME in determining
whether insulin treatment or any medical complications of diabetes will
impact a driver's ability to safely operate a CMV. Therefore, FMCSA
expects that 100 percent of drivers who are treated with insulin and
intend to operate a CMV in interstate commerce will have the form
completed by their TC.
    TCs would be able to fax or scan and email the form to the
certified ME. Consistent with OMB's commitment to minimizing
respondents' recordkeeping and paperwork burdens, and the increased use
of secure electronic modes of communication, the Agency anticipates
that approximately 25 percent of the Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus
Assessment Forms would be transmitted electronically.
    The information collected from the Insulin-Treated Diabetes
Mellitus Assessment Form provided to the certified ME will become part
of the CMV driver's record maintained for at least three years by the
certified ME. Therefore, the information will not be available to the
public. The FMCSRs covering driver physical qualification records are
found at 49 CFR 391.43, which specify that a medical

examination be performed on CMV drivers subject to part 391, subpart E
who operate in interstate commerce. The results of the examination
shall be recorded in accordance with the requirements set forth in that
section.
    Title: Medical Qualification Requirements.
    OMB Control Number: 2126-0006.
    Type of Request: Revised collection.
    Respondents: Treating Clinicians (i.e., healthcare professional who
manages and prescribes insulin for treatment of a driver's diabetes
mellitus as authorized by the healthcare professional's applicable
State licensing board).
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 252,117 treating clinicians.
    Estimated Time per Response: 8 minutes.
    Expiration Date: 8/31/2018.
    Frequency of Response: Required.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 33,616 hours.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed
collection is necessary for the performance of FMCSA's functions; (2)
the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for FMCSA to enhance the
quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize or include your
comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

    Issued under the authority of 49 CFR 1.87 on: July 20, 2017.
G. Kelly Regal,
Associate Administrator for Office of Research and Information
Technology and Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017-15835 Filed 7-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P