[Federal Register: November 2, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 212)]
[Notices]
[Page 64515-64516]
[DOCID:fr02no06-33]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0427; FRL-8238-2]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Nonmetallic Mineral
Processing (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1084.08, OMB Control Number 2060-
0050

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 4,
2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-OECA-
2006-0427, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket

Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement and
Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code 2201T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB at: Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

    Note: The EPA Docket Center suffered damage due to flooding
during the last week of June 2006. The Docket Center is continuing
to operate. However, during the cleanup, there will be temporary
changes to Docket Center telephone numbers, addresses, and hours of
operation by people who wish to visit the Public Reading Room to
view documents. Consult EPA's Federal Register notice at 71FR 38147
(July 15, 2006) or the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
 for current information on docket status; locations and

telephone numbers.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Fried, Office of Compliance,
Assessment and Medium Programs Division (CAMPD), Mail Code 2223A,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On June 21, 2006, (71 FR 35652), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2006-0427, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov, or, in person viewing at the

Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The
EPA Docket

Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov
, to submit or view public comments, access the

index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA

receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov
.

    Title: NSPS for Nonmetallic Mineral Processing (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1084.08, OMB Control Number 2060-0050.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on November 30, 2006.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The Administrator has judged that PM emissions from
nonmetallic mineral processing plants cause or contribute to air
pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health
or welfare. This standard applies to owners or operators of new,
modified, or reconstructed facilities at nonmetallic mineral processing
plants that commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction
after August 1, 1985. Nonmetallic mineral processing includes the
following affected facilities: each crusher, grinding mill, screening
operation, bucket elevator, belt conveyor, bagging operation, storage
bin, and enclosed truck or railcar loading station. This standard does
not apply to facilities located in underground mines; stand-alone
screening operations; operations that only involve recycled asphalt;
fixed sand gravel, or crushed stone plants with capacities of 25 tons
per hour or less; portable sand, gravel, or crushed stone plants with
capacities of 150 tons per hour or less; common clay or pumice plants
with capacities of 10 tons per hour or less. Additionally, when an
existing facility is replaced by a piece of equipment of equal or
smaller size it is not subject to the standard until all facilities in
a production line are replaced. Affected facilities in the plant
process that are subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart F, for Portland
Cement NSPS, or subpart I, Asphalt Concrete Plants NSPS, are not
subject to this NSPS.
    Respondents must submit the following one-time-only reports:
notification of the date of construction or reconstruction,
notification of the actual date of initial startup, notification of any
physical or operational change to an existing facility which may
increase the regulated pollutant emission rate, notification of
demonstration of the continuous emission monitor system (CMS) where the
CMS is required (wet scrubber), notification of the date of the initial
performance test, and the results of the initial performance test. Wet
mining/screening operations are exempt from all requirements of the
regulation, except an initial report and record describing the location
of these operations. The general provision requirement to submit a
notification of the anticipated date of initial startup is being waived
for respondents subject to this standard. The required notifications
are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source
becomes subject to the standard.
    Respondents are also required to maintain records of the occurrence
and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation
of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring
system is inoperative. Owners or operators of facilities using a wet
scrubber must record the measurements of both the change in pressure of
the gas stream across the scrubber and the scrubbing liquid flow rate
and submit semiannual reports for occurrences when the measurements of
the scrubber pressure loss (or gain) and liquid flow rate differ by
more than 30 percent from the averaged determined during
the most recent performance test. All records shall be retained for at
least two years. The information collected from recordkeeping and
reporting requirements are necessary to ensure compliance with these
standards, as required by section 114(a) of the Clean Air Act.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 5.6
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Nonmetallic mineral processing
plants.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 3,825.
    Frequency of Response: Initial.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 31,026.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $1,772,177 which includes $0
annualized capital startup costs, $0 annualized O&M costs, and
$1,772,177 annualized labor costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the estimates from
the previous ICR.

    Dated: October 26, 2006.
Oscar Morales,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E6-18489 Filed 11-1-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


  HYPERLINK "http://www.tfhrc.gov/hnr20/recycle/waste/mwst3.htm"
http://www.tfhrc.gov/hnr20/recycle/waste/mwst3.htm

Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

	Granular Base

INTRODUCTION

Waste rock, mill tailings, and coarse coal refuse can be used as a
granular base in pavement construction applications. Burnt coal refuse
(or red dog) from banks or piles that have caught on fire has also been
used as a granular base material.

Waste Rock

Waste rock derived from igneous or metamorphic rocks, as well as
properly consolidated limestones, sandstones, and dolomites are
generally suitable for granular base and subbase applications, provided
the waste rocks do not contain deleterious components and are not
commingled with overburden.

Mill Tailings

Coarser-sized mill tailings can be used in granular base and subbase
applications. Generally, the coarser, sand-size fractions of mill
tailings can also be considered for use as construction aggregates,
provided there are no harmful or reactive chemical components
concentrated from the host rock. Despite the fine size of most mill
tailings, these materials can be blended with coarser materials, such as
gravel, to bring the overall fines content to an acceptable range, or
can often be classified prior to initial disposal in order to recover
the coarser fraction for possible use.

Coal Refuse

Coarse coal refuse can be used as aggregate in granular base
applications. Burnt coal refuse (red dog) is also a suitable granular
base material. Proper compaction of coarse coal refuse to its maximum
dry density is necessary to achieve stability within a pavement
structure. Fine coal refuse slurry has little or no load carrying
capability and is, therefore, unsuitable for use as a construction
material.

The carbonaceous content of coal refuse, its potential for spontaneous
combustion, as well as its pyritic or sulfur composition and acidic
nature are causes for environmental concern.

PERFORMANCE RECORD

The use of mineral processing waste as a granular base material is not
very common, since many mineral processing wastes are not close to urban
areas where construction materials are needed. There is little current
research or actual reported use of such wastes in granular base
construction.

Waste Rock

A review of the published and unpublished reports reveals that at least
13 states have made use of some source of waste rock in their state
highway construction programs, sometimes dating back as many as 50
years. However, it does not appear that any state highway agencies or
universities have been involved in research for waste rock use as
aggregate in granular base or subbase applications.(1)

Mill Tailings

At least five states, including Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, and
Virginia, have reported using mill tailings as aggregate in granular
base course applications, although the Arkansas experience was not
considered successful, due to poor performance or economics.(1) Other
states that have made some use of mill tailings for granular base or
subbase construction in the past include California, Colorado, Idaho,
Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Tennessee.(2)

Coal Refuse

Coal refuse has been successfully used in cement stabilized base
applications in Europe. The success of this material for use in this
application is reportedly dependent on proper compaction. There has been
occasional use of coal refuse in Alabama, Kentucky, Virginia, and West
Virginia as an alternative material for bases and subbases.(1,2,3)

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation has rejected anthracite
refuse usage as aggregate for base and subbase courses because of high
percent losses in the sodium sulfate (soundness test).(4,5) West
Virginia is evaluating the use of coal refuse as subbase material.

The Ministry of Transport in the United Kingdom permits the use of
incinerated coal refuse (well- burnt, nonplastic shale) as a granular
subbase material in Ministry controlled road work.(6)

MATERIAL PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS

Waste Rock

Crushing and Screening

Where the waste rock consists of hard, stable chunks of rock with no
overburden or vegetation, granular aggregate material can be produced by
crushing. Crushing and screening can be accomplished using conventional
aggregate processing equipment.

Mill Tailings

Dewatering

Processing of certain tailings sources (such as dewatering, reclaiming,
and selective size classification) may be necessary, although this is
not common practice and can be costly. Tailings reclaimed from ponds
will normally require a reasonable period of time to dewater, depending
on climatic conditions.

Screening

Some tailings materials may contain sufficient coarse sizes (greater
than 2.0 mm (No. 10 sieve) or 4.75 mm (No.4 sieve)) that could be
classified and separated from the finer fraction for possible use as a
granular base material.

Coal Refuse

Separation or Cleaning

The basic coal refuse processing techniques used in coal preparation
plants are separation of the coal from the unwanted foreign matter
(pyrite and marcasite). The equipment most frequently used in these
plants to classify the refuse is based on the difference in specific
gravity between the coal and the host rock.

For older refuse banks, additional separation or cleaning may be
required in the field to remove and recover the combustible portion of
coarse coal refuse for use as fuel, prior to using the remaining refuse
material as a granular base or subbase material. Such cleaning also
serves to prevent potential spontaneous combustion of the refuse.

ENGINEERING PROPERTIES

Waste Rock

Some of the properties of waste rock that are of particular interest
when waste rock is used in granular base applications include gradation,
specific gravity, and shear strength.

Gradation: Waste rock is generally coarse, crushed, or blocky material
covering a range of sizes, from very large boulders and rocks to
sand-size particles and dust. Waste rock can be crushed and screened for
use or blended with other aggregates to generate a product suitable for
granular base or subbase aggregate.

Specific Gravity: The average specific gravity of waste rock is about
2.65, with a range from 2.4 to 3.6 depending on the nature of the
mineral constituents. Specific gravity may be used to determine other
important properties such as void ratio or porosity.(7)

Shear Strength: Typical values of the angle of internal friction of most
waste rock sources exceed 35 degrees and contribute to relatively high
bearing capacity and stability.

Mill Tailings

Some of the properties of mill tailings that are of particular interest
when mill tailings are used in granular base applications include
gradation, particle shape and texture, unit weight, and moisture-density
characteristics. It is difficult to definitively characterize
representative samples of mill tailings materials because of the number
of sources and the variations in the degree of processing that can be
encountered.

Gradation: Typically, mill tailings range from sand to silt-clay in
particle size with 40 to 90 percent passing a 0.075 mm (No. 200) sieve.
They are normally disposed of in slurry form by pumping into large
retention areas/settlement ponds.(8) Despite the fine size of most mill
tailings, these materials can be classified prior to disposal or blended
with coarser materials, such as gravel, to bring the overall fines
content to an acceptable range for use as a construction aggregate.

Shape and Texture: Mill tailings consist of hard, angular, siliceous
particles.

Unit Weight: Iron and taconite tailings typically have high unit weight
values up to as high as 2700 kg/m3 (170 lb/ft3). The unit weight of most
other tailings sources is expected to range from 1500 kg/m3 (90 lb/ft3)
to 2200 kg/m3 (135 lb/ft3), which is comparable to that of most natural
aggregates, which are approximately 2,000 kg/m3 (125 lb/ft3) to 2300
kg/m3 (140 lb/ft3).(8)

Moisture-Density Characteristics: With the possible exception of iron
ore or taconite tailings, most mill tailings have an optimum moisture
content in the range of 10 to 18 percent. The maximum dry density of
most tailings sources is in the range of 1600 kg/m3 (100 lb/ft3) to 2025
kg/m3(125 lb/ft3).(9)

Coal Refuse

Some of the properties of coal refuse that are of particular interest
when coal refuse is used in granular base applications include
gradation, particle shape/ texture, moisture-density characteristics,
shear strength, permeability, and frost susceptibility.

Gradation: Coarse refuse, which can contain particles that are greater
than a 4.75 mm (No. 4) sieve, is generally a well-graded material for
particles up to 100 mm (4 in) in size. These particles consist mainly of
slate or shale with some sandstone or clay. Most coarse refuse contains
particles that may break down under compaction equipment, resulting in a
finer gradation following placement.

Shape/Texture: Coal refuse is composed mainly of flat slate or shale
particles with some coal, sandstone, and clay intermixed. Such particles
may weather or break down easily.

Moisture-Density Characteristics: Based on available data, the optimum
moisture content of coarse coal refuse is likely to range from 6 to 15
percent and its maximum dry density may vary from 1300 kg/m3 (80 lb/ft3)
to 2000 kg/m3 (120 lb/ft3).(6)

Shear Strength: The shear strength of coarse coal refuse can be highly
variable. The angle of internal friction values for coarse coal refuse
have been reported to be between 18 and 42 degrees.(10) The shear
strength of coal refuse is usually lower than that obtained for granular
materials with similar properties, but can be increased by proper
compaction.(6,10,11) Previous experience with coal refuse usage as a
construction material has demonstrated that the shear strength of the
refuse is acceptable if proper compaction measures are achieved during
construction.(10,12)

Permeability: The permeability of coarse coal refuse can be highly
variable and should be determined for each particular source and
application. It is related to the composition of the refuse, its
degradation during compaction, and the degree of compaction.(10,13) The
permeability of coarse coal refuse is lower than that of other granular
materials with a similar grain size distribution. Conventional formulas
relating permeability to particle size distribution and uniformity are
not applicable for estimating the permeability of coarse coal
refuse.(14)

Low permeability values are desirable in order to reduce air circulation
and to reduce the potential for spontaneous combustion, oxidation of
pyrites, and acidic leachate. Fly ash may be added to the refuse for
this purpose. The average permeability for coal refuse-fly ash mixtures
is significantly lower (10-6 to 10-7 cm/sec) than that for the coal
refuse alone (10-3 x 10-5 cm/sec) because fly ash fills the voids of the
coal refuse.(14,15)

Frost Susceptibility: Coal refuse is susceptible to frost heave,
especially burnt coal refuse. Frost damage can reportedly be reduced or
eliminated by the addition of cement to the refuse.(16)

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Waste Rock

There are no standard specifications for the use of crushed waste rock
in granular base applications. Most sources of waste rock are of a
quality that is comparable to conventional aggregates used as granular
base materials, so specifications applicable to such aggregates can
probably be used, provided sufficient compaction is achieved.

Mill Tailings

There are no standard specifications for mill tailings as an aggregate
in granular base. The tailings must meet sizing requirements and satisfy
standard Proctor moisture-density criteria.(17) Durability testing may
also be required. Most tailings sources may have an excess amount of
material finer than the 4.75 mm (No. 4) or 2.00 mm (No. 10) sieve. This
will either limit their use in granular base course applications or
necessitate separation and use of the coarser fraction of the tailings.

Mill tailings to be used in granular base should also be tested in
accordance with AASHTO test methods T234(18) and T236(19) to determine
the shear strength characteristics and to define the angle of internal
friction and cohesion of the material tested. The California bearing
ratio (CBR) test (AASHTO T193)(20) can also be used to evaluate the
subgrade bearing capacity.(22)

Coal Refuse

Tests for combustion potential and standard Proctor moisture-density
criteria should be carried out for all coal refuse that is considered
for use in granular base construction. Leaching and swelling indexes,
porosity, freeze-thaw tests, and wet-dry swelling tests are also
recommended. Water soluble sulfate testing methods and specifications
for determining the amount of sulfate found in coal refuse and measures
used to overcome such sulfate content are available from the British
National Coal Board.(21) The introduction of fly ash to coal refuse may
help to neutralize the acidity of the refuse, increase its
moisture-holding capacity, increase its pore space volume, and reduce
its erodability.(22) Lime and/or cement added as a binding agent with
the fly ash produces a pozzolanic reaction, which can provide added
strength and durability to the coal refuse/fly ash mixture.(22)

Coal refuse to be used in granular base should also be tested in
accordance with AASHTO test methods T234(23) and T236(24) to determine
the shear strength characteristics and to define the angle of internal
friction and cohesion of the material tested. The CBR test (AASHTO
T193)(25) can also be used to evaluate the subgrade bearing
capacity.(22)

CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES

Material Handling and Storage

Waste Rock and Mill Tailings

The same methods and equipment used to store or stockpile conventional
aggregates are applicable for waste rock or mill tailings.

Coal Refuse

Prior to using the refuse to construct a granular base, the bank should
be cleaned or processed to recover the residual coal or combustible
matter. This ordinarily involves a screening of the refuse, which also
removes oversize and deleterious materials.

Placing and Compacting

Waste Rock

The same methods and equipment used to place and compact conventional
aggregate can be used for the placement of waste rock. As with any other
oversize rock placement, compaction operations must be inspected on a
continuous basis to ensure that the specified degree of compaction can
be achieved, or that there is no movement under the action of compaction
equipment.

Mill Tailings

No modifications to normal construction equipment or procedures are
needed, except that tailings may need to be dried to near optimum
moisture content prior to placement and compaction.

Coal Refuse

No significant modifications to normal construction procedures are
needed, except that possible material breakdown under compaction
equipment requires more repetitive testing in the field. Proper
compaction of coal refuse reduces air voids to less than 10 percent, and
can reduce the permeability to less than 10-5 to 10-6 cm/sec, which is
very low. Under such conditions, the material is sufficiently dense for
base course construction and the potential for ignition is substantially
reduced.(6)

Quality Control

Waste Rock and Mill Tailings

The same test procedures used for conventional aggregate are appropriate
for waste rock and mill tailings, although waste rock may have particles
that are too large for certain in-place density tests. The same field
test procedure used for conventional aggregate are recommended for
granular base applications when using waste rock or mill tailings.
Standard laboratory and field test methods for compacted density are
given by AASHTO T191,(26 T205,(27) T238, (28)and T239.(29))

Coal Refuse

Strict compaction control testing must also be performed when using coal
refuse as a base. A determination of the sulfate levels leached from the
coarse refuse materials is required in order to design for the
protection of any adjacent concrete structures. The pH value of the
refuse in water should also be determined for proper selection of type
of underdrain or other drain pipes.

UNRESOLVED ISSUES

Relatively little is known about how variations in mineral processing
operations can alter the quality of mineral processing wastes.(30)

Waste Rock and Mill Tailings

There is also a need to determine whether specific sources of such
materials are environmentally suitable for use in granular base
construction. In addition, there is a need to develop engineering data
on the design properties and performance of potential waste rock and/or
mill tailings used in granular base applications.

Coal Refuse

There is a need to further evaluate the environmental concerns regarding
the potential for acidic leachate from coarse coal refuse used in
granular base applications. The production of such leachate is caused by
the oxidation of pyrite and marcasite with the presence of high sulfur
content. If acidic leachate were to be produced over time, it could
contaminate groundwater, adversely impact the ecosystem, and cause
deterioration or corrosion of underdrains or other drain pipes.

More information may be needed to completely mitigate concerns
associated with the spontaneous combustion potential of coarse coal
refuse.

REFERENCES

Collins, R. J. and S. K. Ciesielski. Recycling and Use of Waste
Materials and By-Products in Highway Construction. National Cooperative
Highway Research Program Synthesis of Highway Practice 199,
Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1994.

Collins, R. J., and Miller, R. H. Availability of Mining Wastes and
their Potential for Use as Highway Material. Federal Highway
Administration, Report No. FHWA-RD-76-106, Washington, DC, May, 1976.

Wilmoth, R. C., and R. B. Scott. "Use of Coal Mine Refuse and Fly Ash as
a Road Base Material," Proceedings of the First Symposium on Mine and
Preparation Plant Refuse Disposal. Louisville, Kentucky, October, 1974.

Luckie, P. T., J. W. Peters, and T.S. Spicer. The Evaluation of
Anthracite Refuse as a Highway Construction Material. Pennsylvania State
University, Special Research Report No. SR-57, July, 1966.

Collins, R. J., and R. H. Miller. Availability of Mining Wastes and
Their Potential for Use as Highway Material: Executive Summary. Federal
Highway Administration, Final Report No. FHWA-RD-78-28, Washington, DC,
September 1977.

Maneval, D. R. "Utilization of Coal Refuse for Highway Base or Subbase
Material," Proceedings of the Fourth Mineral Waste Utilization
Symposium. IIT Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois, May, 1974.

Wright Engineers Limited, Golder, Brawner and Associates Limited, and
Ripley, Klohn and Leonoff International Limited. Tentative Design Guide
for Mine Waste Embankments In Canada. Technical Bulletin TB 145, Mines
Branch Mining Research Centre, Department of Energy, Mines and
Resources, Ottawa, Canada, March, 1972.

Emery, J. J. "Use of Mining and Metallurgical Waste in Construction,"
Minerals and Environment, Paper No. 18, London, June, 1974.

Sultan, H.A. Utilization of Copper Mill Tailings for Highway
Construction. Final Technical Report, National Science Foundation,
Washington, DC, January, 1978.

McQuade, P. V., P. E. Glogowski, F. P. Tolcser, and R. B. Anderson.
Investigation of the Use Of Coal Refuse-Fly Ash Compositions as Highway
Base Course Material: State of the Art and Optimum Use Area
Determinations. Federal Highway Administration, Interim Report No.
FHWA-RD-78-208, Washington, DC, September, 1980.

Bishop, C. S. and N. R. Simon. "Selected Soil Mechanics Properties of
Kentucky Coal Preparation Plant Refuse," Proceedings of the Second
Kentucky Coal Refuse Disposal and Utilization Seminar. Lexington,
Kentucky, May, 1976.

Tanfield, R. K., "Construction Uses of Colliery Spoil," Contract
Journal, January, 1974.

Zook, R. L., B. J. Olup, Jr., and J. J. Pierre. "Engineering Evaluation
of Coal Refuse Slurry Impoundments," Transactions of the Society of
Mining Engineers. AIME, Volume 258, March, 1975.

Drenevich, V. P., R. J. Ebelhar, and G. P. Williams. "Geotechnical
Properties of Some Eastern Kentucky Surface Mine Spoils," Proceedings of
the Seventh Ohio River Valley Soils Seminar, Lexington, Kentucky,
October, 1975.

Moulton, L. K., D. A. Anderson, R. K. Seals, and S. M. Hussain. "Coal
Mine Refuse: An Engineering Material," Proceedings of the First
Symposium on Mine and Preparation Plant Refuse Disposal. Louisville,
Kentucky, October, 1974.

Kettle, R. J., and R. I. T. Williams. "Frost Action in Stabilised
Colliery Shale," Presented at the 56th Annual Meeting of the
Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, January, 1977.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Standard Method of Test, "The Moisture-Density Relations of Soils Using
a 5.5-lb [2.5 kg] Rammer and a 12-in. [305 mm] Drop," AASHTO
Designation: T99-86, Part II Tests, 16th Edition, 1993.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Standard Method of Test, "Strength Parameter of Soils by Triaxial
Compression," AASHTO Designation: T 234-85, Part II Tests, 16th Edition,
1993.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials,
Standard Method of Test, "Direct Shear Test of Soils Under Consolidation
Drained Conditions," AASHTO Designation: T236-84, Part II Tests, 16th
Edition, 1993.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Standard Method of Test, "The California Bearing Ratio," AASHTO
Designation: T193-81, Part II Tests, 16th Edition, 1993.

British Standard Institution. "Methods of Testing Soils for Civil
Engineering Purposes, B.S. 1377, Test 9. Determination of the total
sulphate content of soil, and Test 10, Determination of the sulphate
content of groundwater and of aqueous soil extracts." London, 1967.

Pierre, J. J., and C. M. Thompson. User's Manual Coal-Mine Refuse in
Embankments. Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-TS-80-213,
Washington, DC, December, 1979.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Standard Method of Test, "Strength Parameter of Soils by Triaxial
Compression," AASHTO Designation: T 234-85, Part II Tests, 16th Edition,
1993.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Standard Method of Test, "Direct Shear Test of Soils Under Consolidation
Drained Conditions," AASHTO Designation: T236-84, Part II Tests, 16th
Edition, 1993.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Standard Method of Test, "The California Bearing Ratio," AASHTO
Designation: T193-81, Part II Tests, 16th Edition, 1993.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Standard Method of Test, "Density of Soil In-Place by the Sand Cone
Method," AASHTO Designation: T191-86, Part II Tests, 14th Edition, 1986.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Standard Method of Test, "Density of Soil In-Place by the Rubber-Balloon
Method," AASHTO Designation: T205-86, Part II Tests, 14th Edition, 1986.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Standard Method of Test, "Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate in Place by
Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth)," AASHTO Designation: T238-86, Part II
Tests, 14th Edition, 1986.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Standard Method of Test, "Moisture Content of Soil and Soil Aggregate in
Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth)," AASHTO Designation: T239-86,
Part II Tests, 14th Edition, 1986.

Lin, I. J., "Seasonal Effects on Processing Plants." International
Mining, January, 1989.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31844-31847]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12922]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0848; FRL-9350-7]

Notice of Intent to Suspend Certain Pesticide Registrations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 6(f)(2) of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is publishing this Notice of
Intent to Suspend affecting several pesticide products. This Notice is
issued by EPA pursuant to section 3(c)(2)(B) of FIFRA. The Notice of
Intent to Suspend was issued following the Agency's issuance of a Data
Call-In Notice (DCI), which required the registrants of the affected
pesticide products to take appropriate steps to secure certain data,
and following the registrant's failure to submit those data or to take
other appropriate steps to secure the required data. The subject data
were determined to be required to maintain in effect the existing
registrations of the affected products. Failure to comply with the data
requirements of a DCI is a basis for suspension of the affected
registration under section 3(c)(2)(B) of FIFRA.

DATES: The Notice of Intent to Suspend included in this Federal
Register notice will become a final and effective suspension order
automatically by operation of law 30 days after the date of the
registrant's receipt of the mailed Notice of Intent to Suspend or on
June 29, 2012 if the mailed Notice of Intent to Suspend is returned to
the Administrator as undeliverable, if delivery is refused, or if the
Administrator otherwise is unable to accomplish delivery to the
registrant after making reasonable efforts to do so, unless during that
time a timely and adequate request for a hearing is made by a person
adversely affected by the Notice of Intent to Suspend or the registrant
has satisfied the Administrator that the registrant has complied fully
with the requirements that served as a basis for the Notice of Intent
to Suspend. Unit IV explains what must be done to avoid suspension
under this notice (i.e., how to request a hearing or how to comply
fully with the requirements that served as a basis for the Notice of
Intent to Suspend).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jude Andreasen, Pesticide Re-
evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone

number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, farm worker and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be
interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0848, is available either electronically
through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OPP Docket in
the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), located in
EPA West, Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number
for the OPP Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor
instructions and additional information about the docket available at
http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Registrant(s) Issued Notice of Intent to Suspend, Active
Ingredient, Product(s) Affected, Date(s) Issued, Reason(s) Issued, and
Data Requirement(s) Involved

    The Notice of Intent to Suspend was sent via the U.S. Postal
Service (USPS), return receipt requested, to the registrant(s) for the
product(s) listed in Table 1 of this Unit.

                                            Table 1--Information about Issued Notice(s) of Intent To Suspend
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  EPA                               Date EPA
        Registrant affected             Active ingredient    Registration       Product name         issued    Reason(s) issued *    Data requirements
                                                                number                               NOITS                              involved **
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuller System, Inc.................  DDVP..................       1327-36  Fulex DDVP Fumigator..    5/21/12  2,3................  a
Fuller System, Inc.................  Permethrin............       1327-42  Fulex Permethrin          5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
                                                                            Fumigator.
Value Gardens Supply, LLC..........  Naphthalene Acetic          5887-169  Black Leaf Vitamin B1     5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
                                      Acid.                                 Solution.
Foreign Domestic Chemicals Corp....  Rotenone..............        6458-5  Rotenone Resin for        5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
                                                                            Manufacturing Use
                                                                            Only.
Foreign Domestic Chemicals Corp....  Rotenone..............        6458-6  Cube Powder...........    5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
ARI................................  Piperonyl Butoxide....       7754-51  ARI Yard & Patio          5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
                                                                            Formula I.
Athea Laboratories, Inc............  Prometon..............      10088-55  Non-selective             5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
                                                                            Herbicide 3.
Athea Laboratories, Inc............  Prometon..............      10088-83  Prometon 12.5%            5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
                                                                            Herbicide Concentrate.
Amrep, Inc.........................  Prometon..............     10807-146  Weed-a-cide               5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
                                                                            Concentrate.
Amrep, Inc.........................  Prometon..............     10807-206  Misty Weed-a-cide CF..    5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
Brazos Associates, Agent for         Pyrethrins............       15297-1  Bio-Groom Flea & Tick     5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, b, c
 BioDerm Lab.                                                               Shampoo for Dogs &
                                                                            Cats.
Brazos Associates, Agent for         Pyrethrins............       15297-7  Bio-Groom Flea & Tick--   5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, b, c
 BioDerm Lab.                                                               14 Residual Spray
                                                                            with Lanolin Shampoo.
Brazos Associates, Agent for         Permethrin............       15297-9  Bio-Groom Lasting         5/21/12  2,3................  a, c
 BioDerm Lab.                                                               Residual Action Repel-
                                                                            35 Insect Control
                                                                            Spray.
Brazos Associates, Agent for         Pyrethrins............      15297-14  Bio-Groom Flea & Tick     5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, b, c
 BioDerm Lab.                                                               Pyrethrin Dip Conc.
                                                                            For Dogs & Cats.
Brazos Associates, Agent for         Pyrethrins............      15297-17  Bio-Groom Flea & Tick     5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, b, c
 BioDerm Lab.                                                               Pyrethrin Spray.
Brazos Associates, Agent for         Pyrethrins............      15297-19  Bio-Groom Ear Mite        5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, b, c
 BioDerm Lab.                                                               Treatment.
Drexel Chemical Company............  Rotenone..............     19713-316  Drexel 7.4% Rotenone      5/21/12  3..................  a, c
                                                                            Wettable Powder.
Drexel Chemical Company............  DDVP..................     19713-356  Best 4 Servis Brand       5/21/12  2,3................  a, c
                                                                            DDVP 10 Pound Oil
                                                                            Solution.
Drexel Chemical Company............  DDVP..................     19713-357  Best 4 Servis Brand       5/21/12  3..................  a, c
                                                                            DDVP Emulsifiable
                                                                            Spray.
Adams Technology Systems. Agent for  Pyrethrins............       29909-1  Rid Flea and Tick         5/21/12  2,3................  a, b, c
 Cardinal Laboratories, Inc.                                                Shampoo Concentration
                                                                            for Dogs and Cats.
Adams Technology Systems. Agent for  Pyrethrins............       29909-2  Cardinal Flea and Tick    5/21/12  2,3................  a, b, c
 Cardinal Laboratories, Inc.                                                Shampoo for Dogs and
                                                                            Cats.
Adams Technology Systems. Agent for  Pyrethrins............       29909-8  Cardinal Flea & Tick      5/21/12  2,3................  a, b, c
 Cardinal Laboratories, Inc.                                                Spray for Dogs, Cats
                                                                            & Horses.

Adams Technology Systems. Agent for  Pyrethrins............      29909-21  Cardinal Tick             5/21/12  2,3................  a, b, c
 Cardinal Laboratories, Inc.                                                Terminator Flea &
                                                                            Tick Shampoo for Dogs
                                                                            & Cat.
Earth Science Products Corp........  Naphthalene Acetic           43905-1  Wood's Rooting            5/21/12  2,3................  a, c
                                      Acid.                                 Compound.
Premium Environmental Products, LLC  Permethrin............       71280-6  Migratol BP-1.........    5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
Premium Environmental Products, LLC  Permethrin............       71280-7  Migratol BPX-002......    5/21/12  1,2,3..............  a, c
Neogen Corporation.................  Piperonyl Butoxide....       72726-1  Poridon Equine            5/21/12  2,3................  a, c
                                                                            Insecticidal Pour-On.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Reason(s) Issued: (1) failure to submit 90-day response; (2) failure to submit 8-month response; and (3) failure to submit any (or adequate) required
  data.
** Data Requirements Involved: (a) product chemistry; (b) product performance; (c) toxicology.

III. Basis for Issuance of Notice of Intent To Suspend

    The affected registrant(s) failed to submit the required data or
information or to take other appropriate steps to secure the required
data. The subject data requirements for each affected product are
summarized in Table 1 and are also specifically identified in EPA-HQ-
OPP-2010-0848 in a document entitled Appendix II--Requirement List.
Also included in the docket is Appendix III--Explanatory Appendix,
which provides more detailed information about the reason(s) the Notice
of Intent to Suspend was issued and pertinent background information
and history. Each Notice of Intent to Suspend that was mailed to the
affected registrant(s) included all of the referenced appendices that
are pertinent to the particular Notice of Intent to Suspend.
Instructions on accessing the docket are in Unit I.B.

IV. How to avoid suspension under this notice?

    1. You may avoid suspension under this notice if you or another
person adversely affected by this notice properly request a hearing
within 30 days of your receipt of the Notice of Intent to Suspend by
mail or, if you did not receive the notice that was sent to you via
USPS first class mail return receipt requested, then within 30 days
from the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register
(see DATES). If you request a hearing, it will be conducted in
accordance with the requirements of section 6(d) of FIFRA and the
Agency's procedural regulations in 40 CFR part 164. Section 3(c)(2)(B)
of FIFRA, however, provides that the only allowable issues which may be
addressed at the hearing are whether you have failed to take the
actions which are the bases of this notice and whether the Agency's
decision regarding the disposition of existing stocks is consistent
with FIFRA. Therefore, no substantive allegation or legal argument
concerning other issues, including but not limited to the Agency's
original decision to require the submission of data or other
information, the need for or utility of any of the required data or
other information or deadlines imposed, any allegations of errors or
unfairness in any proceedings before an arbitrator, and the risks and
benefits associated with continued registration of the affected
product, may be considered in the proceeding. The Administrative Law
Judge shall by order dismiss any objections which have no bearing on
the allowable issues which may be considered in the proceeding. Section
3(c)(2)(B)(iv) of FIFRA provides that any hearing must be held and a
determination issued within 75 days after receipt of a hearing request.
This 75-day period may not be extended unless all parties in the
proceeding stipulate to such an extension. If a hearing is properly
requested, the Agency will issue a final order at the conclusion of the
hearing governing the suspension of your product. A request for a
hearing pursuant to this notice must:
     Include specific objections which pertain to the allowable
issues which may be heard at the hearing.
     Identify the registrations for which a hearing is
requested.
     Set forth all necessary supporting facts pertaining to any
of the objections which you have identified in your request for a
hearing.
    If a hearing is requested by any person other than the registrant,
that person must also state specifically why he/she asserts that he/she
would be adversely affected by the suspension action described in this
notice. Three copies of the request must be submitted to: Hearing
Clerk, 1900, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. An additional copy should be sent to
the person who signed this notice. The request must be received by the
Hearing Clerk by the applicable 30th day deadline as measured from your
receipt of the Notice of Intent to Suspend by mail or publication of
this notice, as set forth in the DATES section and in Unit IV.1., in
order to be legally effective. The 30-day time limit is established by
FIFRA and cannot be extended for any reason. Failure to meet the 30-day
time limit will result in automatic suspension of your registration by
operation of law and, under such circumstances, the suspension of the
registration for your affected product will be final and effective at
the close of business on the applicable 30th day deadline as measured
from your receipt of the Notice of Intent to Suspend by mail or
publication of this notice in the Federal Register, as set forth in the
DATES section and in Unit IV.1., and will not be subject to further
administrative review. The Agency's rules of practice at 40 CFR 164.7
forbid anyone who may take part in deciding this case, at any stage of
the proceeding, from discussing the merits of the proceeding ex parte
with any party or with any person who has been connected with the
preparation or presentation of the proceeding as an advocate or in any
investigative or expert capacity, or with any of their representatives.
Accordingly, the following EPA offices, and the staffs thereof, are
designated as judicial staff to perform the judicial function of EPA in
any administrative hearings on this Notice of Intent to Suspend: The
Office of the

Administrative Law Judges, the Office of the Environmental Appeals
Board, the Administrator, the Deputy Administrator, and the members of
the staff in the immediate offices of the Administrator and Deputy
Administrator. None of the persons designated as the judicial staff
shall have any ex parte communication with trial staff or any other
interested person not employed by EPA on the merits of any of the
issues involved in this proceeding, without fully complying with the
applicable regulations.
    2. You may also avoid suspension if, within the applicable 30 day
deadline period as measured from your receipt of the Notice of Intent
to Suspend by mail or publication of this notice in the Federal
Register, as set forth in the DATES section and in Unit IV.1., the
Agency determines that you have taken appropriate steps to comply with
the FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B) Data Call-In notice. In order to avoid
suspension under this option, you must satisfactorily comply with
Appendix II, which can be found in the Docket, for each product by
submitting all required supporting data/information described in
Appendix II and in the Explanatory Appendix (Appendix III) (both may be
found in the Docket for this Federal Register notice and both are
summarized in Table 1 of Unit II) to the following address (preferably
by certified mail): Office of Pesticide Programs, Pesticide Re-
evaluation Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. For you to avoid automatic
suspension under this notice, the Agency must also determine within the
applicable 30-day deadline period that you have satisfied the
requirements that are the bases of this notice and so notify you in
writing. You should submit the necessary data/information as quickly as
possible for there to be any chance the Agency will be able to make the
necessary determination in time to avoid suspension of your product.
The suspension of the registration of your company's product pursuant
to this notice will be rescinded when the Agency determines you have
complied fully with the requirements which were the bases of this
notice. Such compliance may only be achieved by submission of the data/
information described in Appendix II, which may be found in the Docket
and which is summarized in Table 1 of Unit II.

V. Status of Products That Become Suspended

    Your product will remain suspended until the Agency determines you
are in compliance with the requirements which are the bases of this
notice and so informs you in writing.
    After the suspension becomes final and effective, the registrant
subject to this notice, including all supplemental registrants of the
product listed in Table 1 of Unit II., may not legally distribute,
sell, use, offer for sale, hold for sale, ship, deliver for shipment,
or receive and (having so received) deliver or offer to deliver, to any
person, the product listed in Table 1 of Unit II. Persons other than
the registrant subject to this Notice, as defined in the preceding
sentence, may continue to distribute, sell, use, offer for sale, hold
for sale, ship, deliver for shipment, or receive and (having so
received) deliver or offer to deliver, to any person, the product
listed in Table 1 of Unit II.
    Nothing in this Notice authorizes any person to distribute, sell,
use, offer for sale, hold for sale, ship, deliver for shipment, or
receive and (having so received) deliver or offer to deliver, to any
person, the product listed in Table 1 of Unit II. in any manner which
would have been unlawful prior to the suspension.
    If the registration for your product listed in Table 1 of Unit II.
is currently suspended as a result of failure to comply with another
FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B) Data Call-In Notice or section 4 Data
Requirements notice, this notice, when it becomes a final and effective
order of suspension, will be in addition to any existing suspension,
i.e., all requirements which are the bases of the suspension must be
satisfied before the registration will be reinstated.
    It is the responsibility of the basic registrant to notify all
supplementary registered distributors of a basic registered product
that this suspension action also applies to their supplementary
registered products. The basic registrant may be held liable for
violations committed by their distributors.
    Any questions about the requirements and procedures set forth in
this notice or in the subject FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B) Data Call-In
Notice, should be addressed to the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

VI. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    The Agency's authority for taking this action is contained in
sections 3(c)(2)(B) and 6(f)(2) of FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: May 21, 2012.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-12922 Filed 5-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 27 (Thursday, February 8, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5655-5658]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02483]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82623; File No. SR-IEX-2018-01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify
the Default Handling of Market Orders Entered With a Time-in-Force of
DAY

February 2, 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 January 22, 2018, the Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or
the ``Exchange'') 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

    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\4\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\5\
Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or ``Exchange'') is filing with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule
change to modify the default handling of market orders \6\ entered with
a time-in-force of DAY.\7\ The Exchange has designated this rule change
as ``non-controversial'' under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and
provided the Commission with the notice required by Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\9\ The text of the proposed

rule change is available at the Exchange's website at
www.iextrading.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \5\ 17 CRF 240.19b-4.
    \6\ See Rule 11.190(a)(2).
    \7\ See Rule 11.190(c)(3).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
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 these statement may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to modify the default
handling of market orders entered with a time-in-force of DAY
(hereinafter referred to as ``market DAY orders'').
    Pursuant to Rule 11.190(a)(2), the Exchange offers Users a market
order, which is an order type that allows Users to buy or sell a stated
amount of a security that is to be executed at or better than the NBBO
at the time the order reaches the Exchange.\10\ Specifically, pursuant
to Rule 11.190(a)(2), market orders do not trade through Protected
Quotations,\11\ consistent with Rule 611(a)(1) of Regulation NMS.\12\
Moreover, any portion of a market order that is designated as an IEX
Only order \13\ will be canceled if, upon receipt by the System,\14\ it
cannot be executed by the Exchange in accordance with the Exchange's
order execution rules.\15\ Any portion of a market order that is not
designated as an IEX Only order (i.e., routable orders as described in
IEX Rule 11.230(b)) that cannot be executed in full in accordance with
the Exchange's order execution rules when reaching the Exchange will be
eligible for routing away pursuant to IEX Rule 11.230(a)(2). A routable
market order will trade at increasingly aggressive prices, fully
satisfying all Protected Quotations, until the order is fully filled,
reaches the LULD Price Band,\16\ or reaches the Router Constraint.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A market order is always non displayed, may be a MQTY (as
defined in Rule 11.190(b)(11)), may be routable or IEX Only, may not
be designated as an ISO (as defined in Rule 11.190(b)(12)), and may
not be submitted with a limit price. See Rules 11.190(a)(2)(B)-(D),
and (F)-(G).
    \11\ See Rule 1.160(bb)
    \12\ See 17 CFR 242.611(a)(1).
    \13\ See Rule 11.190(b)(6).
    \14\ See Rule 1.160(nn).
    \15\ See Rules 11.230 and 11.230(a).
    \16\ See Rule 11.280(e)(5)(A).
    \17\ See Rule 11.190(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Rule 11.190(a)(2)(A), market orders must have a time-
in-force of IOC, FOK, or, DAY, depending on the User election.\18\
Pursuant to Rule 11.190(a)(2)(E)(iii), market DAY orders, by default,
are rejected, unless the User specifically elects to configure one or
more of its connectivity ports to accept market DAY orders.\19\ Market
orders with a time-in-force of IOC and FOK are accepted and eligible to
trade during the Regular Market Session only.\20\ Market DAY orders are
eligible to trade or route during the Regular Market Session and
treated by the System as having a time-in-force of IOC. Furthermore,
market DAY orders submitted before the open of the Regular Market
Session are queued by the System until the Opening Auction (or Halt
Auction, as applicable) \21\ for IEX-listed securities, or until the
Opening Process for non-IEX listed securities pursuant to IEX Rule
11.231, except market DAY orders that are designated to route pursuant
to Rule 11.230(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Market orders with a time-in-force of GTT, GTX, and SYS,
are rejected. See Rules 11.190(a)(2)(E)(iv)-(vi).
    \19\ A User can elect for the Exchange to accept market orders
with a time-in-force of DAY on the Equities Port Request Form on
pages 8-9 of its initial IEX Connectivity Agreement and Forms. A
User may also change an existing connectivity port to accept market
orders with a time-in-force of DAY by submitting an updated Equities
Port Request Form to [email protected].
    \20\ See Rule 1.160(gg).
    \21\ See Rule 11.350(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, pursuant to Rule 11.190(f)(1), market orders,
including market DAY orders entered during continuous trading are
subject to the IEX Order Collar, which prevents any incoming order or
order resting on the Order Book, including those marked ISO, from
executing at a price outside the Order Collar price range (i.e.
prevents buy orders from trading at prices above the collar and
prevents sell orders from trading at prices below the collar). The
order collar price range is calculated using the numerical guidelines
for clearly erroneous executions.
    The default treatment for market DAY orders was implemented based
on informal discussions with various market participants who indicated
that such orders are not typically utilized by market participants
during continuous trading because of their aggressive trading
characteristics. As a result, the Exchange determined that the default
treatment for market DAY orders was appropriate.
    On August 4, 2017, the Commission approved a proposed rule change
filed by the Exchange to adopt rules governing auctions for IEX-listed
securities, including Opening and Closing Auction processes that
establish IEX Official Opening and Closing Prices for each trading day,
as well as IPO, Halt, and Volatility Auction processes utilized to
conduct initial public offerings, and resume trading after a regulatory
trading halt or pause in an IEX-listed security (collectively, ``IEX
Auctions'').\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81316 (August 4,
2017), 82 FR 37474 (August 10, 2017)(SR-IEX-2017-10). See also Rules
11.350(a)(12) and (10), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the iterative process of designing IEX Auctions, informal
discussions with various market participants indicated that
notwithstanding the atypical use-case for the entry of market DAY
orders during continuous trading, such orders are in fact ordinarily
utilized by investors to interact with the auction processes of certain
primary listing markets, because market DAY orders retain their
aggressive pricing characteristics, which increases the likelihood of
execution and adds depth of liquidity in the auction, while remaining
constrained to the auction match price, therefore passively benefiting
from the price discovery process.\23\ Accordingly, as proposed, the
Exchange will instead allow all connectivity port sessions across all
Members to accept market DAY orders by default.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See e.g., Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``Bats'') Rules
11.9(a)(2) and 11.23(a)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Exchange designed the IEX Auction processes to
account for market DAY orders by queueing such orders on the Auction
Book \24\ for participation in an upcoming auction when the order type
is not eligible for trading in the current market session (i.e., during
the Pre-Market Session for the Opening Auction), or when there is no
active continuous trading (i.e., during the Order Acceptance Period
\25\ before an IPO, Halt, or Volatility Auction), and then immediately
canceling any unfilled portion immediately after the auction. This
design allows Users to leverage the benefits of interacting with the
IEX Auction processes using market DAY orders while mitigating the
potentially

harmful impact of such orders that could manifest during continuous
trading. Specifically, pursuant to Rule 11.350(a)(1):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Rule 11.350(a)(1).
    \25\ See Rules 11.1350(a)(29)(A)-(C).

     The Opening and IPO Auction Books include market orders
with a time-in-force of DAY entered during the Order Acceptance
Period, and in the case of the Opening Auction, before the Opening
Auction Lock-In Time; \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Rule 11.350(a)(22).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The Halt Auction Book includes market orders with a
time-in-force of DAY received during the Order Acceptance Period
within the Regular Market Session, or queued prior to the Regular
Market Session for securities that have not traded during the
Regular Market Session on that trading day (i.e., market orders with
a time-in-force of DAY entered during the Pre-Market Session for the
Opening Auction that are participating in a Halt Auction pursuant to
Rule 11.350(c)(2)(D) or (E)(ii)); and
     The Volatility Auction Book includes market orders with
a time-in-force of DAY received during the Order Acceptance Period
within the Regular Market Session.

    However, if a User does not have their connectivity ports properly
configured to allow market DAY orders, such auction interest would be
rejected by default. While, as noted above, a User can elect for the
Exchange to accept market DAY orders by submitting an Equities Port
Request Form, the process of making system changes to modify, test, and
deploy the configuration adds additional complexity for Members and the
Exchange. Therefore, to simplify User interaction with the System and
allow Users to efficiently leverage the benefits of interacting with
the IEX Auction processes using market DAY orders, the Exchange is
proposing to eliminate the default rejection of market DAY orders and
the corresponding User elected connectivity port settings for the
acceptance of market DAY orders. As proposed, the Exchange will instead
allow all connectivity port sessions across all Members to accept
market DAY orders by default.
    The proposed changes do not amend the behavior of market DAY
orders, as described above. Moreover, notwithstanding the potentially
aggressive trading characteristics of market orders generally, the
Exchange believes that there are sufficient limitations on execution of
market orders, as described above, to mitigate against such concerns.
    As announced in IEX Trading Alerts #2017-015 and #2017-046, the
Exchange intends to become a primary listing exchange and support its
first IEX-listed security in 2018.\27\ In addition, as part of the
listings initiative, the Exchange is providing a series of industry
wide weekend tests for the Exchange and its Members to exercise the
various technology changes required to support IEX Auctions and
listings functionality.\28\ Accordingly, the Exchange is proposing to
amend the default acceptance of market DAY orders in advance of the
industry wide testing period in order to allow Members and other market
participants time to develop, test, and deploy any necessary changes to
support the handling of market DAY orders for participation in IEX
Auctions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See IEX Trading Alert #2017-015 (Listings Specifications,
Testing Opportunities, and Timelines), May 31, 2017. See also IEX
Trading Alert #2017-046 (IEX Listings Timeline Update), originally
published on Monday, October 30, 2017, and re-published on Tuesday,
October 31, 2017.
    \28\ See, e.g., IEX Trading Alert #2017-028 (First Listings
Functionality Industry Test on Saturday, August 26), August 17,
2017; IEX Trading Alert #2017-037 (Second Listings Functionality
Industry Test on Saturday, September 9), September 7, 2017; IEX
Trading Alert #2017-039 (Third Listings Functionality Industry Test
on Saturday, September 23), September 18, 2017; IEX Trading Alert
#2017-040 (Rescheduled 4th Listing Functionality Industry Test),
September 29, 2017; IEX Trading Alert #2017-046 (IEX Listings
Timeline Update), originally published on Monday, October 30, 2017,
and re-published on Tuesday, October 31, 2017; and IEX Trading Alert
#2017-047 (Fourth Listings Functionality Industry Test on Saturday,
November 4), October 31, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    IEX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6(b) \29\ of the Act in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \30\ in particular, in that it
is 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, because it does not alter the
substantive behavior of market DAY orders, but instead simplifies the
process of entering market DAY orders for all Members. Specifically,
the proposed changes are designed to simplify User interaction with the
System and allow Users to efficiently leverage the benefits of
interacting with the IEX Auction processes by eliminating the default
rejection of market DAY orders and the corresponding User elected
connectivity port settings for the acceptance of market DAY orders. The
Exchange further believes that since the proposed changes do not amend
the behavior of market DAY orders, the proposed rule changes are
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because the limitations on execution of market orders, as discussed in
the purpose section, would continue to mitigate against potential
adverse market impact from such orders during continuous trading.
    Additionally, IEX notes that no other exchange utilizes default
rejection of orders comparable to market DAY order types.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See, e.g., Bats Rule 11.9(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes are
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because the Exchange is proposing to amend the default behavior of
market DAY orders during the industry wide testing period for Members
and other market participants to test with IEX as a primary listing
exchange, and in advance of the first listing transferring to IEX,
which will allow Members and other market participants time to develop,
test, and deploy any necessary changes to support the handling of
market DAY orders for participation in IEX Auctions.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See supra note 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, as discussed in the purpose section, the process of
making system changes to modify, test, and deploy the port setting
configurations on a Member-by-Member basis adds additional technical
complexities for Members and the Exchange. Thus, the Exchange believes
the proposed rule changes are consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest in that the Exchange is proposing to
simplify the process of entering market DAY orders, thereby reducing
overall technical complexities within the System that raise risks to
Exchange operations, Members, and their investor clients.
    Lastly, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would
not result in unfair discrimination, since the proposed changes amend
the default behavior of market DAY orders across all connectivity
ports. Thus, all Members will be eligible to enter market DAY orders on
a fair and equal basis.

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

    IEX does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that the
proposed changes do not impact inter-market competition since it is
merely designed

to simplify the entry of market DAY orders for all Members, without
substantively changing the approved rules governing the behavior of
such orders. Moreover, as noted above, no competing exchanges impose a
similar requirement.
    In addition, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed
changes will have any impact on intra-market competition, because as
discussed in purpose section, the proposed changes amend the default
behavior of market DAY orders across all connectivity ports. Thus, all
Members will be eligible to enter market DAY orders on a fair and equal
basis.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The Exchange has designated this rule filing as non-controversial
under Section 19(b)(3)(A) \33\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \34\
thereunder. 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 for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \34\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \35\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 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-IEX-2018-01 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-IEX-2018-01. This file
number should be included in 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 Section, 100 F Street NE, Washington,
DC 20549-1090. Copies of the filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the IEX's principal office and on its
internet website at www.iextrading.com. 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-IEX-
2018-01 and should be submitted on or before March 1, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-02483 Filed 2-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 14, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6711-6712]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03031]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0234]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
Mellitus

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 27 individuals from the
prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs)
against persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from
operating a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. The
exemptions enable these individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable on November 14, 2017. The
exemptions expire on November 14, 2019.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and/or Room W12-140 on the
ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed
at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On October 11, 2017, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of
applications from 27 individuals requesting an exemption from diabetes
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) and requested comments from the
public (82 FR 47301). The public comment period ended on November 13,
2017, and five comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would
achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that
would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(3).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding diabetes
found in 49 CFR 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.

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received five comments in this proceeding from Ms. Marisol
Aguilar. These comments are outside of the scope of the notice.

IV. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is
likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would
be achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows the applicants
to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on the program eligibility criteria and an individualized
assessment of information submitted by each applicant. The
qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant
were stated and

discussed in detail in the October 11, 2017 Federal Register notice (82
FR 47301) and will not be repeated in this notice.
    These 27 applicants have had ITDM over a range of one to 63 years.
These applicants report no severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in
loss of consciousness or seizure, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning symptoms, in the past 12 months and no recurrent (two
or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the past five years. In each
case, an endocrinologist verified that the driver has demonstrated a
willingness to properly monitor and manage his/her diabetes mellitus,
received education related to diabetes management, and is on a stable
insulin regimen. These drivers report no other disqualifying
conditions, including diabetes related complications. Each meets the
vision requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Consequently, FMCSA finds
that in each case exempting these applicants from the diabetes
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level of
safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

V. Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1)
Each driver must submit a quarterly monitoring checklist completed by
the treating endocrinologist as well as an annual checklist with a
comprehensive medical evaluation; (2) each driver must report within
two business days of occurrence, all episodes of severe hypoglycemia,
significant complications, or inability to manage diabetes; also, any
involvement in an accident or any other adverse event in a CMV or
personal vehicle, whether or not it is related to an episode of
hypoglycemia; (3) each driver must provide a copy of the
ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the Medical Examiner at
the time of the annual medical examination; and (4) each driver must
provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the employer for
retention in the driver's qualification file, or keeping a copy in his/
her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-employed. The driver
must also have a copy of the exemption when driving, for presentation
to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official.

VI. Preemption

    During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with
respect to a person operating under the exemption.

VII. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 27 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above:

James J. Aden (MN)
Serafim S. Amaral (CA)
John E. Biel (PA)
Adam D. Comer (AR)
Timothy P. Conner (VA)
Miguel P. Flores (WA)
Mark J. Fulks (IA)
Daniel Gonzalez, III (TX)
Chad A. Hayden (IN)
Joseph F. Hubenka (NE)
Galen M. Hurd, III (SC)
Edward S. Jacobs (MI)
Jason D. Jones (OK)
David M. Kelly (MD)
Robert A. Leboffe (PA)
Tanner H. Littlefield (RI)
Veneta K. Mayor (NV)
Randy J. Nekuda (NE)
Thomas M. Reece (NC)
Michael L. Rivera (NY)
Gary L. Robbins (OR)
Eddie Rodriguez, Jr. (TX)
Erwin R. Rud (MN)
Diane L. Simmons (ID)
Russell Van Alphen (MA)
Thomas C. Williams (KS)
Glen E. Wray, Jr. (PA)

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption
will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked
earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following
occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of
the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of
safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation
of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives
of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

    Issued on: February 7, 2018.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-03031 Filed 2-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P