[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 158 (Friday, August 15, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48262-48264]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19337]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72811; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2014-079]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Modify NASDAQ Rule 7051 Fees Relating to Pricing for Direct Circuit
Connections

August 11, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 1, 2014, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASDAQ is proposing to modify NASDAQ Rule 7051 to establish direct
connectivity and installation fees for a 1Gb Ultra connection option.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at
nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com at NASDAQ's principal office, 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, NASDAQ included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ is proposing to amend NASDAQ Rule 7051 entitled ``Direct
Connectivity to Nasdaq'' to clarify the Exchange's direct connectivity
services. Currently, the Exchange offers two direct connectivity
options for customers who are not co-located at the Exchange's
datacenter, a 10Gb circuit connection and a 1Gb circuit connection.\3\
Separate installation and ongoing monthly fees apply to each option.
For 1Gb connectivity, the Exchange assesses an installation fee of
$1,000 and ongoing monthly fees of $1,000. For 10Gb connectivity, the
Exchange charges an installation fee of $1,000 and ongoing monthly fees
of $5,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62663 (August 9,
2010), 75 FR 49543 (August 13, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-077).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to keep pace with changes in technology, the Exchange now
proposes to provide a 1Gb ``Ultra'' fiber connection offering, which
uses new lower latency switches.\4\ A switch is a type of network
hardware that acts as the ``gatekeeper'' for all clients' orders sent
to the system (``System'') \5\ at the NASDAQ facility and orders them
in sequence for entry into the System for execution. Each of NASDAQ's
current connection offerings use different switches, but the switches
are of uniform type within each offering (i.e., all 1G connectivity
options currently use the same switches). As a consequence, all client
subscribers to a particular connectivity option receive the same
latency in terms of the capabilities of their switches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The term ``latency'' for the purposes of this rule filing
means a measure of the time it takes for an order to enter into a
switch and then exit for entry into the System.
    \5\ As defined in NASDAQ Rule 4751(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1Gb Ultra offering will use a low latency switch, which
provides faster processing of orders sent to it in comparison to the
current 1G switch in use for Exchange connectivity. As a consequence,
direct connect clients needing only 1Gb of bandwidth, but that seek
faster processing of those orders as they enter NASDAQ's exchange
facility now have the option to subscribe to a faster and more
efficient connection to the Exchange.
    The Exchange proposes an ongoing monthly subscription fee of $1,500
for a 1Gb Ultra connection plus a one-time installation fee of $1,500.
NASDAQ believes that the pricing reflects the hardware and other
infrastructure and maintenance costs to NASDAQ associated with offering
technology that is at the forefront of the industry. The $1,500
installation fee for the 1Gb Ultra product exceeds the $1,000
installation fee for the existing 1Gb product due to the added
complexity of installing the Ultra product. In order to achieve lower
latency, the Ultra product requires not only the installation of a
fiber telecommunications line but it also requires the additional
installation of sophisticated switching equipment.
    The new low latency service will be completely optional. Potential
customers will make a determination based on whether they perceive a
sufficient value in adopting the new service. This new low latency
service decreases the time individual orders are processed and market
data is transmitted by these new switches. The Exchange's proposal
provides the client the option for faster switch processing, which is
highly valued among some market participants. NASDAQ notes that other
markets have adopted low-latency connectivity options for their users.
For example, the International Securities Exchange LLC (``ISE'') offers
a 10Gb low latency Ethernet connectivity option to its users, which
provides a ``higher speed network to access [ISE's] Optimise trading
system.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66525 (March 7,
2012), 77 FR 14847 (March 13, 2012) (SR-ISE-2012-09).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\7\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility or system which NASDAQ operates or controls, and is not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that this proposal is consistent with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act in that it is an equitable allocation of fees and is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act because the proposal is not
unfairly discriminatory because it offers a completely optional new
direct connectivity choice to customers who are not co-located at the
Exchange's datacenter and all client subscribers that opt for this
particular connectivity

option and associated fee will receive the same latency in terms of the
capabilities of their switches. Also, the proposal is consistent with
an equitable allocation of fees and is not unfairly discriminatory
because the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges offer various connectivity services as a means to facilitate
the trading activities of customers. Accordingly, fees charged for
direct connectivity services are constrained by the fees charged for
the various alternative connectivity options, including co-location,
direct connectivity, and connecting via a third party vendor (extranet
or ISV), as well as fees charged by other exchanges, taking into
consideration the different costs associated with these service types.
It should be noted, however, that the costs associated with direct
connect clients are primarily fixed costs that include the costs of
installing and maintaining the network and direct connections
(including the switch and cabling). Accordingly, the Exchange
establishes a range of direct connect fees with the goal of covering
these same fixed costs and covering marginal costs, such as the cost of
electricity and data center space for the equipment, labor costs
associated with the installation and of the equipment and cabling, as
well as for entitling the clients to the various services and feeds
carried by these connections. The proposed optional new low latency
direct connectivity choice simply provides one more way in which a
customer can choose to connect.
    If a particular exchange charges excessive fees for direct
connectivity services, affected members will opt to terminate their
direct connectivity arrangements with that exchange, and pursue a range
of alternative trading strategies not dependent upon the exchange's
direct connectivity services. Accordingly, the exchange charging
excessive fees would stand to lose not only direct connectivity
revenues and any other revenues associated with the customer's
operations. Moreover, all of the Exchange's fees for these services are
equitably allocated consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act and
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act are non-discriminatory in
that all direct connect clients are offered the same service and there
is no differentiation among them with regard to the fees charged for
such services.

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

    The Exchange 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, as amended.\9\
As discussed above, the Exchange believes that the proposed fees for
direct connectivity services are comparable to the fees charged for the
same service provided to co-locations customers. Additionally, such
costs are constrained by the robust competition for order flow among
exchanges and non-exchange markets, because direct connectivity exists
to advance that competition, and excessive fees for direct connectivity
services would serve to impair an exchange's ability to compete for
order flow rather than burdening competition. Therefore, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change enhances, rather than burdens,
competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\11\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \12\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-079 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-079. 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 Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NW., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-079, and should
be submitted on or before September 5, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-19337 Filed 8-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


NVFEL NR Cycle Test Report Page 1 Purpose The purpose of this test sequence was to determine if the proposed Ramped Modal Cycle ( RMC) emissions with a 2013 like engine and catalyst system correlated to the established steady state 8 mode test cycle for nonroad diesel engines ( C 1). In addition two PM measurement filter media were checked for correlation. Results of the PM media correlation will be reported separately. The RMC test was developed in part to capture discrete regeneration events associated with advanced catalyst systems like NOx adsorbers that are anticipated to meet future non road emission standards. To achieve this the RMC calls for sampling gaseous and particulate emissions continuously over the cycle. The C 1 specifies that samples be taken for only a portion of the time at each mode.

Test Procedures Engine Description The engine used for this testing was a European Cummins ISBe onhighway engine with a 5.9 l displacement. The engine details are shown in Table 1. The engine was de rated to simulate a non road ( NR) application. A lowpressure loop EGR system was used to reduce engine out NOx emissions. This system draws exhaust downstream of the catalysts, cools it with engine coolant, and introduces it to the compressor inlet via an STT EMTEC valve. The EGR and fuel system calibrations allowed the engine to achieve about 2.5 g/ hp hr NOx over the RMC and C 1 cycles.

Table 1: Summary of major engine specifications.

Engine: 2002 Cummins ISBe Engine Configuration: 6 cylinder, turbocharged aftercooled, DI diesel with 4 valves/ cylinder Rated Power: 134 kW ( 180 bhp) @ 2500 rpm Peak Torque: 746 N m ( 550 ft lb) @ 1800 rpm Fuel System: Bosch Common Rail Bore X Stroke: 102 mm X 120 mm Displacement: 5.88 L Compression Ratio: 16.3: 1 NVFEL NR Cycle Test Report Page 2 Exhaust System Description A multi path catalyst system as described previously in SAE 2003 01 2305 was used for this test. This system consists of four exhaust flow paths each containing a PM filter and NOx adsorber. A DOC was located after the four flow paths were rejoined into a single path. The catalyst details are described in Table 2. The multi path system regenerates the NOx adsorbers periodically by closing off the regenerating leg. While the exhaust flow is reduced in this way diesel fuel is injected to cause the exhaust to go rich and regenerate the adsorber.

Test Fuel The fuel used for this testing was Phillips Chemical Company Lot 2CULD01. The fuel was specified to be similar to what is expected to be available starting in 2006. The key exception is the sulfur level that is well below the 2007 cap of 15 ppm. The specifications are given in Table 3.

Test Cycles Initially the C 1 was run with 10 minute modes as specified by ISO 8178 4 8.1.2. Likewise emissions were recorded for the last 3 minutes of each mode. A single PM sample was taken for the complete cycle. PM was time weighted according to the modal weighting factors. In this case a 2 or 3 minute sample was taken for each mode depending on the weighting. The engine was conditioned for 5 minutes at rated power prior to each cycle. Table 2. Summary of the major specifications of the exhaust emission control system components.

Device Monolith Type Cell Density ( cpsi) Wall Thickness ( mil) Diameter ( inches) Length ( inches) PGM Pt/ Pd/ Rh PGM Loading ( g/ ft3) Base Metal Type** Monoli th Volum e ( L) Total Volume ( L)

CDPF Corning DuraTrap EC   200 12 5.66 6 1/ 0/ 0 50 n/ a 2.47 9.88 NOx Adsorber Corning Celcor   400 4 5.66 10 Trimetal*   100 Ba, K 4.12 16.48 DOC Corning Celcor   400 4 9.5 6 1/ 0/ 0 70 n/ a 6.97 6.97 * Supplier did not provide the PGM ratio for combined 4" and 6" two substrate NOx adsorber assembly ( totaling 10" in length per flow path). ** Supplier did not provide base metal loading information for the NOx adsorbers tested. NVFEL NR Cycle Test Report Page 3 The C 1 cycle was repeated with 5 minute modes as specified in 40 CFR 89 Subpart E Appendix B Table 1, 8 Mode Test Cycle For Variable Speed Engines. Modal and gaseous emissions were recorded for the last 3 minutes of each mode to satisfy 40 CFR 89.407( c)( 10 11).

The RMC's were also conditioned at rated power for 5 minutes prior to start. The RMC was run as both 20 minute and 30 minute cycles for comparison purposes. The cycles were run with 20 second ramps between modes according to the sequence and times given in Table 4. The table does not include the 20 second ramps between modes.

Table 4. RMC Cycles 20 min. Cycle 30 min. Cycle Mode Speed Torque (%) Time ( s) Time ( s) 1 Idle no load 81 126 2 Intermediate 100 99 159 3 Intermediate 50 100 160 4 Intermediate 75 102 162 5 Rated 100 156 246 6 Rated 10 104 164 7 Rated 75 158 248 8 Rated 50 157 247 9 Idle no load 83 128 The first set of C 1 and RMC cycles was run with two different filter media. The test sequence is shown in Table 5. The second set of cycles was run without PM measurement. The second set alternated C 1 and RMC cycles. Table 3. Summary of diesel fuel properties.

Test Method Results Net Heat of Combustion, ASTM D3338 92 ( MJ/ kg) 43.07 Density @ 15.5 ° C ( g/ cm3) 0.8343 Cetane Number 43.0 Cetane Index 50.3 Olefins, FIA D1319 93 (% Vol.) 3.5 Aromatics, D1319 93 (% Vol.) 26.2 Sulfur, ASTM D2622 ( ppm mass) < 0.7 Carbon, ASTM D3343 95 (% mass) 0.8658 Distillation Properties, ASTM D86 IBP ( ° C): 178 10 % ( ° C): 200 50 % ( ° C): 257 90 % ( ° C): 322 End Point ( ° C): 351 NVFEL NR Cycle Test Report Page 4 Table 5. Initial Test Sequence Cycle Filter Media a) C 1 TX 40 b) C 1 teflo c) RMC TX 40 d) RMC teflo e) repeat a d 7x The intermediate and rated speeds for this engine were determined to be 1818 rpm and 2500 rpm respectively. One hundred percent load values were 550 and 380 lb ft at these speeds.

Laboratory The engine and exhaust emission control system was tested at Heavy Duty Engine Site 2 at the U. S. EPA   NVFEL facility in Ann Arbor, MI. The test site is equipped with a 600 hp DC dynamometer and a Horiba full flow CVS and particulate measurement system. Dilute gaseous regulated emissions were measured using a Horiba MEXA 7200DLE analyzer bench per 40 CFR § 86 Subpart N.

Results Test results are discussed in the text of the Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel RIA, section <IP_ADDRESS>. A summary table of data is given in Table 6. NVFEL NR Cycle Test Report Page 5 Table 6. Emission Summary ISO C 1 ( 80 minutes total) Run Nox ( g/ hp hr) HC ( g/ hp hr) CO ( g/ hp hr) PM ( g/ hp hr) Filter C 1 a 0.28 0.10 0.00 0.008 TX 40 C 1 b 0.32 0.12 0.00 0.006 Teflo C 1 e 0.33 0.10 0.00 0.006 TX 41 C 1 f 0.34 0.10 0.00 0.004 Teflo C 1 I 0.32 0.07 0.00 0.006 TX 42 C 1 j 0.37 0.08 0.00 0.004 Teflo C 1 m 0.29 0.14 0.00 0.006 TX 43 C 1 n 0.26 0.07 0.00 0.004 Teflo C 1 q 0.28 0.06 0.00 0.006 TX 44 C 1 r 0.28 0.06 0.00 0.004 Teflo C 1 u 0.32 0.08 0.00 0.006 TX 45 C 1 v 0.32 0.07 0.00 0.002 Teflo C 1 y 0.29 0.06 0.00 0.006 TX 46 C 1 z 0.35 0.08 0.00 0.003 Teflo 20 minute RMC Run Nox ( g/ hp hr) HC ( g/ hp hr) CO ( g/ hp hr) PM ( g/ hp hr) Filter RMC_ c 0.236 0.080 0.00 0.007 TX 40 RMC_ d 0.266 0.083 0.00 0.005 Teflo RMC_ g 0.242 0.085 0.00 0.007 TX 40 RMC_ h 0.228 0.086 0.00 0.005 Teflo RMC_ k 0.284 0.075 0.00 0.006 TX 40 RMC_ l 0.157 0.154 0.01 0.008 Teflo RMC_ o 0.247 0.077 0.00 0.006 TX 41 RMC_ p 0.239 0.076 0.00 0.004 Teflo RMC_ s 0.250 0.072 0.00 0.008 TX 42 RMC_ t 0.240 0.078 0.00 0.006 Teflo RMC_ w 0.273 0.060 0.00 0.006 TX 43 RMC_ x 0.254 0.058 0.00 0.004 Teflo RMC_ aa 0.262 0.067 0.00 0.005 TX 44 RMC_ ab 0.245 0.088 0.00 0.003 Teflo CFR C 1 ( 40 minutes total) Run Nox ( g/ hp hr) HC ( g/ hp hr) CO ( g/ hp hr) C 1 a 0.31 0.09 0.00 C 1 c 0.25 0.07 0.00 C 1 e 0.28 0.04 0.00 C 1 g 0.31 0.06 0.00 C 1 I 0.26 0.05 0.00 C 1 k 0.30 0.05 0.00 C 1 m 0.31 0.05 0.00 30 minute RMC Run Nox ( g/ hp hr) HC ( g/ hp hr) CO ( g/ hp hr) RMC_ b 0.24 0.09 0.00 RMC_ d 0.27 0.08 0.00 RMC_ f 0.26 0.08 0.00 RMC_ h 0.29 0.08 0.00 RMC_ j 0.29 0.07 0.00 RMC_ L 0.31 0.07 0.00 RMC_ n 0.28 0.08 0.00 NVFEL NR Cycle Test Report Page 6


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 109 (Friday, June 5, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34719-34722]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12197]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1999-6156; FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2004-17195; FMCSA-
2005-22194; FMCSA-2006-23773; FMCSA-2006-24015; FMCSA-2006-24783;
FMCSA-2007-0071; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2008-0021; FMCSA-2009-0011;
FMCSA-2010-0050; FMCSA-2010-0082; FMCSA-2011-0366; FMCSA-2011-0379;
FMCSA-2012-0104; FMCSA-2012-0106; FMCSA-2013-0029; FMCSA-2013-0165;
FMCSA-2013-0166; FMCSA-2013-0167; FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-2013-0174;
FMCSA-2014-0002; FMCSA-2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0004; FMCSA-2014-0005;
FMCSA-2014-0006; FMCSA-2015-0056; FMCSA-2015-0347; FMCSA-2015-0348;
FMCSA-2015-0351; FMCSA-2016-0024; FMCSA-2016-0028; FMCSA-2016-0029;
FMCSA-2017-0017; FMCSA-2017-0024; FMCSA-2018-0012]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 72
individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these individuals to continue to
operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision
requirements in one eye.

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates
stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in
the discussions below. Comments must be received on or before July 6,
2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-1999-6156, Docket No. FMCSA-
1999-6480, Docket No. FMCSA-2004-17195, Docket No. FMCSA-2005-22194,
Docket No. FMCSA-2006-23773, Docket No. FMCSA-2006-24015, Docket No.
FMCSA-2006-24783, Docket No. FMCSA-2007-0071, Docket No. FMCSA-2007-
27897, Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0021, Docket No. FMCSA-2009-0011, Docket
No. FMCSA-2010-0050, Docket No. FMCSA-2010-0082, Docket No. FMCSA-2011-
0366, Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0379, Docket No. FMCSA-2012-0104, Docket
No. FMCSA-2012-0106, Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0029, Docket No. FMCSA-2013-
0165, Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0166, Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0167, Docket
No. FMCSA-2013-0169, Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0174, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-
0002, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0003, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0004, Docket
No. FMCSA-2014-0005, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0006, Docket No. FMCSA-2015-
0056, Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0347, Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0348, Docket
No. FMCSA-2015-0351, Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0024, Docket No. FMCSA-2016-
0028, Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0029, Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0017, Docket
No. FMCSA-2017-0024, or Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0012 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Operations; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting comments.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (Docket No. FMCSA-1999-6156; FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2004-17195;
FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2006-23773; FMCSA-2006-24015; FMCSA-2006-24783;
FMCSA-2007-0071; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2008-0021; FMCSA-2009-0011;
FMCSA-2010-0050; FMCSA-2010-0082; FMCSA-2011-0366; FMCSA-2011-0379;
FMCSA-2012-0104; FMCSA-2012-0106; FMCSA-2013-0029; FMCSA-2013-0165;
FMCSA-2013-0166; FMCSA-2013-0167; FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-2013-0174;
FMCSA-2014-0002; FMCSA-2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0004; FMCSA-2014-0005;
FMCSA-2014-0006; FMCSA-2015-0056; FMCSA-2015-0347; FMCSA-2015-0348;
FMCSA-2015-0351; FMCSA-2016-0024; FMCSA-2016-0028; FMCSA-2016-0029;
FMCSA-2017-0017; FMCSA-2017-0024; FMCSA-2018-0012), indicate the
specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and
provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit
your comments and material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery,
but please use only one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a phone
number in the body of your document so that FMCSA can contact you if
there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
put the docket number, FMCSA-1999-6156; FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2004-
17195; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2006-23773; FMCSA-2006-24015; FMCSA-
2006-24783; FMCSA-2007-0071; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2008-0021; FMCSA-
2009-0011; FMCSA-2010-0050; FMCSA-2010-0082; FMCSA-2011-0366; FMCSA-
2011-0379; FMCSA-2012-0104; FMCSA-2012-0106; FMCSA-2013-0029; FMCSA-
2013-0165; FMCSA-2013-0166; FMCSA-2013-0167; FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-
2013-0174; FMCSA-2014-0002; FMCSA-2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0004; FMCSA-
2014-0005; FMCSA-2014-0006; FMCSA-2015-0056; FMCSA-2015-0347; FMCSA-
2015-0348; FMCSA-2015-0351; FMCSA-2016-0024; FMCSA-2016-0028; FMCSA-
2016-0029; FMCSA-2017-0017; FMCSA-2017-0024; FMCSA-2018-0012, in the
keyword box, and click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click
on the ``Comment Now!'' button and type your comment into the text box
on the following screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment
as an individual or on behalf of a third party and then submit.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to

know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-
addressed postcard or envelope.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period.

B. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Insert the docket number, FMCSA-1999-6156; FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2004-
17195; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2006-23773; FMCSA-2006-24015; FMCSA-
2006-24783; FMCSA-2007-0071; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2008-0021; FMCSA-
2009-0011; FMCSA-2010-0050; FMCSA-2010-0082; FMCSA-2011-0366; FMCSA-
2011-0379; FMCSA-2012-0104; FMCSA-2012-0106; FMCSA-2013-0029; FMCSA-
2013-0165; FMCSA-2013-0166; FMCSA-2013-0167; FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-
2013-0174; FMCSA-2014-0002; FMCSA-2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0004; FMCSA-
2014-0005; FMCSA-2014-0006; FMCSA-2015-0056; FMCSA-2015-0347; FMCSA-
2015-0348; FMCSA-2015-0351; FMCSA-2016-0024; FMCSA-2016-0028; FMCSA-
2016-0029; FMCSA-2017-0017; FMCSA-2017-0024; FMCSA-2018-0012, in the
keyword box, and click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket
Folder'' button and choose the document to review. If you do not have
access to the internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the
Docket Operations in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. To
be sure someone is there to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or
(202) 366-9826 before visiting Docket Operations.

C. 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 www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.transportation.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such
exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to,
or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such
exemption. The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at
the end of the 5-year period. FMCSA grants medical exemptions from the
FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum duration of a
driver's medical certification.
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at
least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual
acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with
corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen)
in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at
least 70[deg] in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability
to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red,
green, and amber.
    The 72 individuals listed in this notice have requested renewal of
their exemptions from the vision standard in Sec.  391.41(b)(10), in
accordance with FMCSA procedures. Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated
these applications for renewal on their merits and decided to extend
each exemption for a renewable 2-year period.

III. Request for Comments

    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

IV. Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), each of the 72
applicants has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an
exemption from the vision standard (see 64 FR 54948; 64 FR 68195; 65 FR
159; 65 FR 20251; 67 FR 10475; 67 FR 38311; 69 FR 8260; 69 FR 17263; 69
FR 26921; 69 FR 31447; 70 FR 57353; 70 FR 72689; 71 FR 6824; 71 FR
6826; 71 FR 14566; 71 FR 19602; 71 FR 27033; 71 FR 30227; 71 FR 32183;
71 FR 41310; 72 FR 39879; 72 FR 52419; 73 FR 6242; 73 FR 11989; 73 FR
15567; 73 FR 16950; 73 FR 27014; 73 FR 27015; 73 FR 28186; 73 FR 36955;
74 FR 41971; 75 FR 9477; 75 FR 9480; 75 FR 13653; 75 FR 14656; 75 FR
19674; 75 FR 22176; 75 FR 25917; 75 FR 27622; 75 FR 27623; 75 FR 28682;
75 FR 36778; 75 FR 36779; 75 FR 39729; 76 FR 54530; 77 FR 5874; 77 FR
13689; 77 FR 15184; 77 FR 17107; 77 FR 17108; 77 FR 17117; 77 FR 23797;
77 FR 26816; 77 FR 27847; 77 FR 27850; 77 FR 29447; 77 FR 33017; 77 FR
36338; 77 FR 38384; 77 FR 38386; 77 FR 44708; 78 FR 34143; 78 FR 47818;
78 FR 52602; 78 FR 62935; 78 FR 63307; 78 FR 64271; 78 FR 64274; 78 FR
76395; 78 FR 77778; 78 FR 78477; 79 FR 1908; 79 FR 2748; 79 FR 10611;
79 FR 13085; 79 FR 14331; 79 FR 14333; 79 FR 14571; 79 FR 18391; 79 FR
18392; 79 FR 21996; 79 FR 22003; 79 FR 23797; 79 FR 27043; 79 FR 27681;
79 FR 28588; 79 FR 29495; 79 FR 29498; 79 FR 35212; 79 FR 35218; 79 FR
35220; 79 FR 38649; 79 FR 38661; 79 FR 47175; 80 FR 59225; 80 FR 59230;
81 FR 1284; 81 FR 1474; 81 FR 6573; 81 FR 15401; 81 FR 17237; 81 FR
20433; 81 FR 20435; 81 FR 21655; 81 FR 28136; 81 FR 28138; 81 FR 39320;
81 FR 42054; 81 FR 48493; 81 FR 52516; 81 FR 66718; 81 FR 66720; 81 FR
66722; 81 FR 81230; 81 FR 90050; 81 FR 91239; 81 FR 96196; 82 FR 20962;
82 FR 37499; 82 FR 58262; 83 FR 6919; 83 FR 6922; 83 FR 6925; 83 FR
15195; 83 FR 15232; 83 FR 24146; 83 FR 28320; 83 FR 28325; 83 FR 28332;
83 FR 45749). They have submitted evidence showing that the vision in
the better eye continues to meet the requirement specified at Sec.
391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is stable. In addition, a
review of each record of safety while driving with the respective
vision deficiencies over the past 2 years indicates each applicant
continues to meet the vision exemption requirements. These factors
provide an adequate basis for predicting each driver's ability to
continue to drive safely in interstate commerce. Therefore, FMCSA
concludes that extending the exemption for each renewal applicant for a
period of 2 years is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that
existing without the exemption.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following
groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of July and
are discussed below. As of July 8, 2020, and in accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 46 individuals have satisfied
the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (64 FR 68195; 65
FR 20251; 67 FR 38311; 69 FR 17263; 69 FR 26921; 69 FR 31447; 70 FR
57353; 70 FR 72689; 71 FR 6826; 71 FR 14566; 71 FR 19602; 71 FR 27033;
71 FR 30227;

72 FR 39879; 72 FR 52419; 73 FR 6242; 73 FR 11989; 73 FR 15567; 73 FR
16950; 73 FR 27014; 73 FR 27015; 73 FR 28186; 74 FR 41971; 75 FR 9477;
75 FR 9480; 75 FR 13653; 75 FR 14656; 75 FR 19674; 75 FR 22176; 75 FR
27622; 75 FR 27623; 75 FR 28682; 76 FR 54530; 77 FR 5874; 77 FR 13689;
77 FR 15184; 77 FR 17107; 77 FR 17108; 77 FR 17117; 77 FR 23797; 77 FR
26816; 77 FR 27847; 77 FR 27850; 77 FR 29447; 77 FR 38386; 78 FR 34143;
78 FR 47818; 78 FR 52602; 78 FR 62935; 78 FR 63307; 78 FR 64271; 78 FR
64274; 78 FR 76395; 78 FR 77778; 78 FR 78477; 79 FR 1908; 79 FR 2748;
79 FR 10611; 79 FR 13085; 79 FR 14331; 79 FR 14333; 79 FR 14571; 79 FR
18391; 79 FR 18392; 79 FR 21996; 79 FR 22003; 79 FR 23797; 79 FR 27043;
79 FR 27681; 79 FR 28588; 79 FR 29495; 79 FR 29498; 79 FR 38649; 80 FR
59225; 80 FR 59230; 81 FR 1284; 81 FR 1474; 81 FR 6573; 81 FR 15401; 81
FR 17237; 81 FR 20433; 81 FR 20435; 81 FR 21655; 81 FR 28136; 81 FR
28138; 81 FR 48493; 81 FR 52516; 81 FR 66718; 81 FR 91239; 81 FR 96196;
82 FR 20962; 82 FR 37499; 82 FR 58262; 83 FR 6919; 83 FR 6922; 83 FR
6925; 83 FR 15195; 83 FR 15232; 83 FR 24146; 83 FR 28325; 83 FR 28332):

Larry Adams, Jr. (FL)
Dean R. Allen (OR)
Scott E. Ames (ME)
Alphonso A. Barco (SC)
Craig J. Belles (NY)
Dwight A. Bennett (MD)
Kolby Blackner (UT)
Bobby R. Brooks (GA)
Levi A. Brown (MT)
William Bucaria, Jr. (FL)
Edwin L. Bupp (PA)
Estra Cadet (FL)
Michael B. Canedy (MN)
Freddie A. Carrasquillo (TX)
William C. Christy (FL)
Steven W. Day (MO)
Johnny Dillard (SC)
Ryan C. Dugan (NY)
Paul W. Fettig (SD)
Brian R. Gallagher (TX)
Brian W. Gillund (MN)
Horace N. Goss (TX)
James B. Grega (PA)
Daniel W. Henderson (TN)
John C. Henricks (OH)
Michael T. Huso (MN)
William D. Jackson (MN)
Danny J. Johnson (MN)
Thomas M. Kaley (PA)
James M. Knef (NJ)
Ty N. Mason (PA)
Richard J. McKenzie, Jr. (MD)
Christopher J. Meerten (OR)
Elmore Nicholson, Jr. (AL)
Thomas G. Ohlson (NY)
John L. Ratayczak (WI)
LeRoy W. Scharkey (MN)
James S. Seeno (NV)
Thomas W. Smith (PA)
Steven S. Smith, Jr. (PA)
Russell J. Soland (MN)
Michael J. Tisher (AK)
Peter A. Troyan (MI)
Willard H. Weerts (IL)
Marvin L. Wernimont (IA)
Richard W. Wylie (CT)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-
2004-17195; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2006-23773; FMCSA-2006-24015;
FMCSA-2007-0071; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2008-0021; FMCSA-2009-0011;
FMCSA-2010-0050; FMCSA-2011-0366; FMCSA-2011-0379; FMCSA-2012-0104;
FMCSA-2013-0029; FMCSA-2013-0165; FMCSA-2013-0166; FMCSA-2013-0167;
FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-2013-0174; FMCSA-2014-0002; FMCSA-2014-0003;
FMCSA-2014-0004; FMCSA-2014-0005; FMCSA-2015-0056; FMCSA-2015-0347;
FMCSA-2015-0348; FMCSA-2015-0351; FMCSA-2016-0024; FMCSA-2017-0017; and
FMCSA-2017-0024. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 8, 2020,
and will expire on July 8, 2022.
    As of July 12, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following individual has satisfied the renewal conditions
for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs
for interstate CMV drivers (75 FR 25917; 75 FR 39729; 77 FR 36338; 79
FR 35220; 81 FR 81230; 83 FR 28325):

Clare H. Buxton (MI)
    The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2010-0082. The
exemption is applicable as of July 12, 2020, and will expire on July
12, 2022.
    As of July 19, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following 12 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (81 FR 39320; 81 FR 66720; 83 FR
28320; 83 FR 28325; 83 FR 45749):

Louis D. Faw (NC)
Ryan N. Goyne (AR)
Bradley C. Helsel (OR)
Kenneth B. Julian (OK)
Keith Kebschull (IL)
Jeffrey N. Lake (IL)
James K. Matthey (PA)
J. B. Rodriguez Mata (TX)
Corey L. Spring (AR)
Travis D. Summerville (IL)
Lora D. Swindall (AL)
Francis J. Toth (PA)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2016-0028; and
FMCSA-2018-0012. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 19, 2020,
and will expire on July 19, 2022.
    As of July 20, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following three individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (64 FR 54948; 65 FR 159; 67 FR
10475; 69 FR 8260; 71 FR 6824; 71 FR 32183; 71 FR 41310; 73 FR 11989;
73 FR 36955; 75 FR 36778; 75 FR 36779; 77 FR 38384; 79 FR 35218; 81 FR
90050; 81 FR 96196; 83 FR 28325):

Daniel R. Franks (OH)
Larry L. Jarvis (VA)
Charles E. Johnston (MO)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-1999-6156; and
FMCSA-2006-24783. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 20, 2020,
and will expire on July 20, 2022.
    As of July 22, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following five individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (79 FR 35212; 79 FR 47175; 81 FR
96196; 83 FR 28325):

Abdulahi Abukar (KY)
Gregory K. Banister (SC)
Amanuel W. Behon (WA)
Bradley C. Hansell (OR)
Seth D. Sweeten (ID)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0006. Their
exemptions are applicable as of July 22, 2020, and will expire on July
22, 2022.
    As of July 29, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following three individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (81 FR 42054; 81 FR 66722; 83 FR
28325):

David L. Evers (MN)
Michael E. Jones (IL)
Noel V. Munoz (NM)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2016-0029. Their
exemptions are applicable as of July 29, 2020, and will expire on July
29, 2022.
    As of July 30, 2020, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following two individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (77 FR 33017; 77 FR 44708; 79 FR
38661; 81 FR 96196; 83 FR 28325):

Damon G. Gallardo (CA)
Gregory A. Reinert (MN)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2012-0106. Their
exemptions are applicable as of July 30, 2020, and will expire on July
30, 2022.

V. Conditions and Requirements

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) Each driver must undergo an annual physical examination (a) by an
ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a certified medical examiner (ME), as defined by Sec.
390.5, who attests that the driver is otherwise physically qualified
under Sec.  391.41; (2) each driver must provide a copy of the
ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the ME at the time of the
annual medical examination; and (3) each driver must provide a copy of
the annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the
driver's qualification file or keep a copy of his/her driver's
qualification if he/her 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. The exemption
will be rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).

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.

VI. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 72 exemption applications, FMCSA
renews the exemptions of the aforementioned drivers from the vision
requirement in Sec.  391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited
above. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), each
exemption will be valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-12197 Filed 6-4-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 92 (Thursday, May 12, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29211-29212]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10206]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2022-0002-N-9]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of information collection; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its
implementing regulations, this notice

announces that FRA is forwarding the Information Collection Request
(ICR) abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and comment. The ICR describes the information collection and
its expected burden. On February 11, 2022, FRA published a notice
providing a 60-day period for public comment on the ICR.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before
June 13, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed ICR
should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find the particular ICR by selecting
``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using
the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Hodan Wells, Information
Collection Clearance Officer, at email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to
issue two notices seeking public comment on information collection
activities before OMB may approve paperwork packages. See 44 U.S.C.
3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.8 through 1320.12. On February 11, 2022, FRA
published a 60-day notice in the Federal Register soliciting comment on
the ICR for which it is now seeking OMB approval. See 87 FR 8082. FRA
received no comments related to the proposed collection of information.
    Before OMB decides whether to approve the proposed collection of
information, it must provide 30 days for public comment. Federal law
requires OMB to approve or disapprove paperwork packages between 30 and
60 days after the 30-day notice is published. 44 U.S.C. 3507(b)-(c); 5
CFR 1320.12(a); see also 60 FR 44978, 44983 (Aug. 29, 1995). OMB
believes the 30-day notice informs the regulated community to file
relevant comments and affords the agency adequate time to digest public
comments before it renders a decision. 60 FR 44983 (Aug. 29, 1995).
Therefore, respondents should submit their respective comments to OMB
within 30 days of publication to best ensure having their full effect.
    Comments are invited on the following ICR regarding: (1) Whether
the information collection activities are necessary for FRA to properly
execute its functions, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FRA's estimates of the burden of
the information collection activities, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used to determine the estimates; (3) ways
for FRA to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
being collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of information
collection activities on the public, including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
    The summary below describes the ICR that FRA will submit for OMB
clearance as the PRA requires:
    Title: State Safety Participation Regulations and Reporting of
Remedial Actions.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0509.
    Abstract: The collection of information is set forth under 49 CFR
part 212, and requires qualified State inspectors to provide various
reports to FRA for monitoring and enforcement purposes concerning State
investigative, inspection, and surveillance activities regarding
railroad compliance with Federal railroad safety laws and regulations.
Additionally, under 49 CFR part 209, subpart E, railroads are required
to report to FRA actions taken to remedy certain alleged violations of
law.
    Type of Request: Extension without change (with changes in
estimates) of a currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses.
    Form(s): FRA F 6180.33/61/67/96/96A/109/110/111/112/144.
    Respondent Universe: States and railroads.
    Frequency of Submission: On occasion.
    Total Estimated Annual Responses: 24,066.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 11,958 hours.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden Hour Dollar Cost Equivalent:
$970,427.
    FRA informs all interested parties that it may not conduct or
sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, a collection
of information that does not display a currently valid OMB control
number.
    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

Brett A. Jortland,
Deputy Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2022-10206 Filed 5-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P