[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 19518]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8268]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent to Rule on Request To Release Airport Property
at the Northeast Philadelphia Airport (PNE), Philadelphia, PA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of request to release airport property.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and invite public comment on the
release of land at the Northeast Philadelphia Airport, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania under the provisions of Section 47125(a) of Title 49
United States Code (U.S.C.).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 9, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered to
the following address: Joseph F. Messina, Divisional Deputy City
Solicitor, City of Philadelphia Law Department, Transportation
Division, One Parkway, 1515 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102-1595
and at the FAA Harrisburg Airports District Office: Lori K. Pagnanelli,
Manager, Harrisburg Airports District Office, 3905 Hartzdale Dr., Suite
508, Camp Hill, PA 17011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lori Ledebohm, Community Planner,
Harrisburg Airports District Office location listed above.
    The request to release property may be reviewed in person at this
same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA invites public comment on the
request to release property at the Northeast Philadelphia Airport under
the provisions of Section 47125(a) of Title 49 U.S.C. On March 28,
2011, the FAA determined that the request to release property at the
Northeast Philadelphia Airport submitted by the City of Philadelphia
(City) met the procedural requirements.
    The following is a brief overview of the request:
    The City requests the release of real property, totaling 3.5 acres,
of aeronautical airport property, to Biagio DeSimone. The land was
originally purchased with City funds in 1945. The purpose of the
release is to sell the land that was airport property to Biagio
DeSimone, the current tenant. The property is located at 11295 E.
Roosevelt Boulevard. The Parcel is currently leased to a tenant
operating as a dealership and is improved with a 6,225 square foot
building being used by the tenant in the operation of its automobile
dealership and a gravel parking lot for customers of the dealership.
The Parcel is not contiguous to the area being operated as the
Northeast Philadelphia Airport. The subject land does not serve an
aeronautical purpose and is not needed for airport development, as
shown on the Airport Layout Plan. All proceeds from the sale of
property are to be used for the capital development of the airport.
Fair Market Value (FMV) will be obtained from the land sale and
reinvested back in the airport.
    Any person may inspect the request by appointment at the FAA office
address listed above. Interested persons are invited to comment on the
proposed release from obligations. All comments will be considered by
the FAA to the extent practicable.

    Issued in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, April 1, 2011.
Lori K. Pagnanelli,
Manager, Harrisburg Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 2011-8268 Filed 4-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 56 (Tuesday, March 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15646-15650]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06621]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74525; File No. SR-ISE-2015-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees

March 18, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 12, 2015, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (the
``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The ISE proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees as described in more
detail below. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site (http://www.ise.com), at the principal office of

the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements 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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees to (1) provide
more favorable Priority Customer \3\ complex order rebates, (2) charge
all legs for complex Crossing Orders,\4\ (3) apply Foreign Exchange
(``FX'') Option fees and rebates to complex orders in FX Option
Symbols,\5\ including Early Adopter FX Option Symbols,\6\ and (4)
eliminate the Market Maker Plus \7\ large size rebate for BAC, SPY, and
IWM. Each of the proposed changes is described in more detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A ``Priority Customer'' is a person or entity that is not a
broker/dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s), as defined in Rule 100(a)(37A).
    \4\ A ``Crossing Order'' is an order executed in the Exchange's
Facilitation Mechanism, Solicited Order Mechanism, Price Improvement
Mechanism (``PIM'') or submitted as a Qualified Contingent Cross
(``QCC'') order. For purposes of the fee schedule, orders executed
in the Block Order Mechanism are also considered Crossing Orders.
    \5\ ``FX Option Symbols'' are options overlying AUM, GBP, EUU
and NDO.
    \6\ ``Early Adopter FX Option Symbols'' are options overlying
NZD, PZO, SKA, BRB, AUX, BPX, CDD, EUI, YUK and SFC.
    \7\ A Market Maker Plus is a Market Maker who is on the National
Best Bid or National Best Offer at least 80% of the time for series
trading between $0.03 and $3.00 (for options whose underlying
stock's previous trading day's last sale price was less than or
equal to $100) and between $0.10 and $3.00 (for options whose
underlying stock's previous trading day's last sale price was
greater than $100) in premium in each of the front two expiration
months. A Market Maker's single best and single worst quoting days
each month based on the front two expiration months, on a per symbol
basis, will be excluded in calculating whether a Market Maker
qualifies for the Market Maker Plus rebate, if doing so will qualify
a Market Maker for the rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Priority Customer Complex Order Rebates
    The Exchange currently provides volume-based tiered rebates for
Priority Customer complex orders when these orders trade with non-
Priority Customer orders in the complex order book, or trade with
quotes and orders on the regular order book. These complex order
rebates are provided to members based on the member's average daily
volume (``ADV'') in Priority Customer complex orders in six volume
tiers as follows: 0 to 29,999 contracts (Tier 1), 30,000 to 74,999
contracts (Tier 2), 75,000 to 124,999 contracts (Tier 3), 125,000 to
224,999 contracts (Tier 4), 225,000 to 299,999 contracts (Tier 5), and
300,000 or more contracts (Tier 6).\8\ The Exchange now proposes to
decrease the volume requirements necessary for achieving higher
Priority Customer complex order rebates. The proposed ADV thresholds
are as follows: 0 to 29,999 contracts (Tier 1), 30,000 to 59,999
contracts (Tier 2), 60,000 to 99,999 contracts (Tier 3), 100,000 to
149,999 contracts (Tier 4), 150,000 to 199,999 contracts (Tier 5), and
200,000 or more contracts (Tier 6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The rebate for the highest tier volume achieved is applied
retroactively to all Priority Customer Complex volume once the
threshold has been reached. For purposes of determining Priority
Customer Complex ADV, any day that the complex order book is not
open for the entire trading day may be excluded from such
calculation; provided that the Exchange will only remove the day for
members that would have a lower ADV with the day included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to increase the rebates provided
for Priority Customer complex orders. Currently, Priority Customer
complex orders receive a rebate of $0.30 per contract in Select Symbols
\9\ and $0.63 per contract in Non-Select Symbols \10\ for Tier 1, $0.35
per contract in Select Symbols and $0.71 per contract in Non-Select
Symbols for Tier 2, $0.39 per contract in Select Symbols and $0.75 per
contract in Non-Select Symbols for Tier 3, $0.41 per contract in Select
Symbols and $0.80 per contract in Non-Select Symbols for Tier 4, $0.43
per contract in Select Symbols and $0.82 per contract in Non-Select
Symbols for Tier 5, and $0.45 per contract in Select Symbols and $0.83
per contract in Non-Select Symbols for Tier 6.\11\ The Exchange now
proposes to increase the rebate in Select Symbols to $0.40 per contract
for Tier 3, $0.43 per contract for Tier 4, $0.45 per contract for Tier
5, and $0.46 per contact for Tier 6. For Non-Select Symbols the rebate
will be increased to $0.78 per contract for Tier 3. Other rebate
amounts will remain unchanged from their current levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ``Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols listed
on the ISE that are in the Penny Pilot Program.
    \10\ ``Non-Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols
excluding Select Symbols.
    \11\ These rebates are provided per contract per leg if the
order trades with non-Priority Customer orders in the complex order
book, or trades with quotes and orders on the regular order book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Fee for Complex Crossing Orders
    The Exchange charges Market Maker,\12\ Non-ISE Market Maker,\13\
Firm Proprietary \14\/Broker-Dealer,\15\ and Professional Customer \16\
orders a fee for complex Crossing Orders of $0.20 per contract. This
fee applies to complex Crossing Orders except for PIM orders of 100 or
fewer contracts (which are subject to a separate fee) and is charged
for all legs for PIM orders and for the largest leg only for all other
Crossing Orders. The Exchange now proposes to charge for all legs for
all Crossing Orders, including QCC orders and orders entered into the
PIM, Facilitation, Block and Solicited Order Mechanisms. Firm
Proprietary and Non-ISE Market Maker contracts traded will remain
subject to the Crossing Fee Cap, as provided in Section IV.H.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The term ``Market Makers'' refers to ``Competitive Market
Makers'' and ``Primary Market Makers'' collectively. See Rule
100(a)(25).
    \13\ A ``Non-ISE Market Maker'' is a market maker as defined in
Section 3(a)(38) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
registered in the same options class on another options exchange.
    \14\ A ``Firm Proprietary'' order is an order submitted by a
member for its own proprietary account.
    \15\ A ``Broker-Dealer'' order is an order submitted by a member
for a broker-dealer account that is not its own proprietary account.
    \16\ A ``Professional Customer'' is a person or entity that is
not a broker/dealer and is not a Priority Customer.
    \17\ The Exchange notes that the relevant citation to the
Crossing Fee Cap currently refers mistakenly to Section VI, which
was renumbered Section IV in connection with the delisting of Mini
Options on ISE, and also uses a previous name ``Firm Fee Cap''. The
Exchange proposes to update this section and make corresponding
changes to other outdated references to the Crossing Fee Cap, as
well as to Market Maker Discount Tiers, which are both now located
in Section IV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Complex FX Option Fees and Rebates
    ISE charges fees and provides rebates for orders in FX Option
Symbols, including Early Adopter FX Option Symbols, executed on the
Exchange. While the Schedule of Fees has separate fees and rebates in
Section III applicable to simple orders in FX option classes, the
complex order fees and rebates for Non-Select Symbols in Section II
currently apply to complex orders in these symbols. The Exchange now
proposes to apply the FX option fees and rebates in Section III to all
trades executed in FX option classes, including both simple and complex
orders. The

proposed fees, which already apply to simple orders in FX option
classes, are briefly described below.
    Maker/Taker Fees and Rebates: Currently, non-Priority Customer
complex orders in FX option classes are charged a fee for removing
liquidity that ranges from $0.85 per contract for Market Maker orders
to $0.87 per contract for Non-ISE Market Maker, Firm Proprietary/
Broker-Dealer and Professional Customer orders. The same rates
similarly apply when these market participants provide liquidity to
Priority Customer orders. Otherwise, the applicable maker fee is $0.10
per contract for Market Maker, Firm Proprietary/Broker-Dealer, and
Professional Customer orders and $0.20 per contract for Non-ISE Market
Maker orders. Priority Customer complex orders are not currently
charged a fee for adding or removing liquidity in FX option classes.
Instead, these orders are eligible for a tiered volume based rebate of
$0.63 per contract to $0.83 per contract when trading with non-Priority
Customer orders in the complex order book, or trading with quotes and
orders on the regular order book. With the proposed change, members
will pay a fee, regardless of adding or removing liquidity, of $0.22
per contract for Market Maker orders (subject to tier discounts),\18\
$0.20 for Market Maker orders sent by an Electronic Access Member
(``EAM''), $0.45 per contract for Non-ISE Market Maker orders, $0.30
per contract for Firm Proprietary/Broker-Dealer and Professional
Customer orders, and $0.40 per contract for Priority Customer orders.
Early Adopter Market Makers participate in a revenue sharing
arrangement as described in footnote 2 to Section III, and will not be
liable for FX option fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The Exchange proposes to clarify in Section IV.C., which
describes the relevant market maker discount tiers, that both simple
and complex orders in FX options classes are now subject to these
tiers pursuant to footnote 3 of Section III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fee for Crossing Orders: Currently, non-Priority Customer complex
orders in FX option classes are charged a fee for Crossing Orders of
$0.20 per contract, or $0.03 to $0.05 per contract for PIM orders of
100 or fewer contracts. With the proposed change, the fee for Crossing
Orders in FX option classes will be $0.22 per contract for Market Maker
orders (subject to tier discounts),\19\ $0.20 per contract for Market
Maker orders sent by an EAM, Non-ISE Market Maker orders, Firm
Proprietary/Broker-Dealer orders, and Professional Customer orders,
and, finally, $0.40 per contract for Priority Customer orders. For PIM
orders of 100 or fewer contracts, the proposed fee would be $0.03 to
$0.05 per contract for non-Priority Customer orders and $0.40 per
contract for Priority Customer orders. Again, Early Adopter Market
Makers will not be charged a fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response Fees and Break-Up Rebates: Currently, the fee for
responses to complex Crossing Orders in FX option classes is $0.90 per
contract for Market Maker orders and $0.95 per contract for all other
market participants. Non-Market Maker orders also receive a PIM break-
up rebate of $0.80 per contract. With the proposed change, all market
participants, except for Early Adopter Market Makers, will pay a fee
for responses to complex Crossing Orders in FX option classes of $0.45
per contract. In addition, non-Market Maker complex orders in these
symbols will be eligible for a PIM break-up rebate of $0.15 per
contract.
4. Market Maker Plus Large Size Rebate for BAC, SPY, and IWM
    In order to promote and encourage liquidity in Select Symbols, the
Exchange currently offers Market Makers who meet the quoting
requirements for Market Maker Plus enhanced rebates for adding
liquidity in those symbols. In May 2014, the Exchange introduced a new
Market Maker Plus rebate for members that meet specified quotation size
requirements on a trade by trade basis in three actively traded Select
Symbols: BAC, SPY, and IWM.\20\ In particular, Market Makers who
qualify as Market Maker Plus in BAC, SPY, and IWM currently earn a
rebate of $0.25 per contract if at the time of the trade their
displayed quantity, in the traded series, is at least 1,000 contracts.
The Exchange now proposes to eliminate this Market Maker Plus large
size rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72163 (May 14,
2014), 79 FR 28985 (May 20, 2014) (SR-ISE-2014-27).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\21\ in general, and
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\22\ in particular, in that it is designed
to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Priority Customer Complex Order Rebates
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to
decrease the volume requirements necessary to achieve the Priority
Customer complex order rebates, and increase the rebate amounts, as
these proposed changes are designed to attract additional Priority
Customer complex order volume to the Exchange. The Exchange already
provides volume-based tiered rebates for Priority Customer complex
orders, and believes that increasing the rebates and lowering the
associated volume thresholds will incentivize members to send
additional order flow to the ISE in order to achieve these rebates for
their Priority Customer complex order volume, creating additional
liquidity to the benefit of all members that trade complex orders on
the Exchange.
    The Exchange further believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to continue to provide a rebate only for Priority
Customer complex orders. A Priority Customer is by definition not a
broker or dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s). This limitation does not apply to
participants whose behavior is substantially similar to that of market
professionals, including Professional Customers, who will generally
submit a higher number of orders (many of which do not result in
executions) than Priority Customers.
2. Fee for Complex Crossing Orders
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to charge
for all legs for all Crossing Orders, including QCC orders and orders
entered into the PIM, Facilitation, Block and Solicited Order
Mechanisms. While this is a fee increase for members that execute
complex Crossing Orders (other than PIM orders), the Exchange believes
that this change is warranted as the current practice effectively
discounts the fee charged for complex Crossing Orders to zero after the
largest leg, effectively subsidizing complex Crossing Orders with
numerous legs. The Exchange no longer believes that this subsidy is
appropriate, and has therefore chosen to discontinue it for all complex
Crossing Orders as it has already done for PIM orders. The Exchange
does not believe that this proposed change is unfairly discriminatory
as it would apply equally to all market participants that trade complex
Crossing Orders on the Exchange.
3. Complex FX Option Fees
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to charge
the same fees for complex orders in FX Option Symbols and Early Adopter
FX Option Symbols as the Exchange

currently charges for simple orders in these symbols. The Exchange
believes that the current table of FX option fees and rebates in
Section III of the Schedule of Fees is appropriate for both simple and
complex orders.\23\ Charging the same fees across the board in these
proprietary products will simplify the Schedule of Fees to the benefit
of members and investors. The Exchange does not believe that this
proposed change is unfairly discriminatory as members are already
assessed fees and rebates for simple orders in FX option classes based
on Section III of the Schedule of Fees. The proposed change will merely
ensure that these members pay the same fees for complex orders in these
symbols as well. For the majority of market participants this means
that fees will be lower, and in some cases significantly lower. Certain
fees, including, for example, fees charged for Priority Customer
orders, however, will be increased with the proposed change. While
Priority Customer orders generally receive several benefits for trading
on ISE, the Exchange does not believe that it is unfairly
discriminatory to reduce some of those benefits here. In this regard,
the Exchange notes that the proposed fee for Priority Customer complex
FX option orders is within the range of fees currently charged by some
of the Exchange's competitors, including NASDAQ OMX PHLX, LLC
(``Phlx'').\24\ Similarly, the Exchange notes that PIM break-up rebates
would be reduced with the proposed rule change. The Exchange believes
that this is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory as
the proposed break-up rebates are set at a level that the Exchange
believes will continue to provide an appropriate incentive for members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The Exchange notes that the proposed change to Section
IV.C. is intended solely to clarify that market maker discount tiers
will be extended to complex orders in FX option classes consistent
with the meaning of footnote 3 to Section III.
    \24\ See Phlx Pricing Schedule, Section III, Singly Listed
Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Market Maker Plus Large Size Rebate for BAC, SPY, and IWM
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable, and not
unfairly discriminatory to eliminate the Market Maker Plus large size
rebate as the Exchange does not believe that this program has satisfied
its intended goals. When ISE introduced this program, the Exchange was
hopeful that the higher rebate would encourage Market Makers to post
deeper size in these actively traded symbols. After running this
program for several months, the Exchange does not believe that the
large size rebate has been an effective incentive for Market Makers.
The Exchange therefore believes that it is appropriate to discontinue
the large size rebate at this time.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\25\ the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden
on intermarket or intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The transaction
fee changes amend various fees and rebates and are designed to attract
additional order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the
proposed fees and rebates are competitive with fees and rebates offered
to orders executed on other options exchanges. The Exchange operates in
a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily
direct their order flow to competing venues. In such an environment,
the Exchange must continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees
and rebates to remain competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons
described above, the Exchange believes that the proposed fee changes
reflect this competitive environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \26\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\27\ because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by ISE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \27\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings 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-ISE-2015-09 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-ISE-2015-09. 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 NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the ISE. 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-ISE-2015-09 and should be
submitted by April 14, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-06621 Filed 3-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 121 (Wednesday, June 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36397-36398]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15519]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0322]

Hours of Service of Drivers: B.R. Kreider & Son, Inc.'s
Application for Exemption

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition; denial of application for
exemption.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its denial of the application of B.R. Kreider
& Son, Inc., (Kreider) for an exemption from the requirement that
drivers of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) be released from work
within 12 hours in order to take advantage of the short-haul exception
to part of the hours of service (HOS) rules. Drivers qualifying for the
short-haul exception are subject to the HOS limits but are not required
to maintain a record of duty status (RODS) during the duty day. FMCSA
concluded that Kreider has not demonstrated how its CMV operations
under such an exemption would be likely to achieve a level of safety
equivalent to or greater than the level of safety that would be
obtained in the absence of the exemption.

DATES: FMCSA denied the application for exemption by letter dated May
21, 2015, after notice and opportunity for public comment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert F. Schultz, Driver and
Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle
Safety Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments submitted to notice requesting public comments on the
exemption application, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit
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., ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. The on-line Federal document
management system is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year.
The docket number is listed at the beginning of this notice.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption
request in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must
provide the public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant
to the application, including any safety analyses that have been
conducted. The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public
comment on the request.
    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted,
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application
and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons receiving
the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the exemption is
granted. The notice must also specify the effective period and explain
the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed
(49 CFR 381.300(b)).
    The HOS rules (49 CFR part 395) generally prohibit drivers from
operating a CMV after the 14th hour measured from the time they come on
duty following 10 consecutive hours off duty, though they must cease
CMV driving at any time that they accumulate 11 hours of driving time
in a duty day. The HOS rules also require operators of CMVs to maintain
a RODS, or log, on board the CMV at all times (Sec.  395.8(a)).
However, Sec.  395.1(e)(1) provides an exception to this requirement
for qualifying ``short-haul'' drivers. Drivers do not have to maintain
a RODS on board the CMV if they (1) operate within a 100 air-mile
radius of the normal work reporting location, (2) return to the work
reporting location and are released from duty within 12 hours of the
time they came on duty, (3) have at least 10 consecutive hours off duty
separating each 12 hours on duty, (4) do not exceed 11 hours driving
following 10 consecutive hours off duty, and (5) the motor carrier that
employs them maintains and retains for a period of 6 months accurate
and true time records showing the time the drivers reported for duty,
the time they are released from duty, and the total number of hours the
drivers are on duty. A driver who expects to qualify for the short-haul
exception does not maintain a RODS on board the CMV. However, if later
in the day the driver discovers that he or she is not going to qualify
for the short-haul exception, the HOS rules require the driver
immediately to prepare a RODS reflecting his or her activities during
the entire day.

Application for Exemption

    Kreider is an interstate motor carrier engaged in the short-haul
transportation of materials such as topsoil, fill, and stone. Kreider's
CMV drivers do not go beyond a 100 air-mile radius of their normal
work-reporting location during their duty day, but it is impossible for
its drivers to complete their duty day within the 12-hour limit.
Kreider believes that it is impractical to require CMV drivers to
prepare a RODS at this point. Kreider states that too much non-
productive driver time results from this requirement. It believes that
the same level of safety would be achieved operating under the short-
haul exception without regard to the 12-hour requirement as would be
achieved in the absence of the exemption.

Public Comments and Agency Decision

    On November 5, 2014, FMCSA published notice of this application and
asked for public comment (79 FR 65757). Twenty-one comments were
received and are available for review in the docket. Kreider indicates
that its drivers are spending 10 minutes making a RODS entry for a 5-
minute stop. However, Agency guidance states that short periods of time
(less than 15 minutes) may be identified on the RODS by drawing a line
from the appropriate on-duty (not driving) or driving line to the
``remarks'' section and entering the amount of time and the geographic
location of the change in duty status (Guidance Statement 1, Sec.
395.8). This should take less than one minute. In addition, the FMCSA
believes that while it is appropriate to relieve drivers of the task of
maintaining a RODS if they limit their duty day to 12 hours,
enforcement of the 11-hour and 14-hour rules would be severely hampered
if roadside officials were deprived of the RODS of drivers whose duty
days have exceeded 12 hours.
    The Agency reviewed Kreider's application and the public comments.
By letter dated May 21, 2015, FMCSA denied the application because the
Agency concluded that Kreider's operations were not likely to achieve a
level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level of safety that
would be achieved in the absence of the exemption [49 CFR
381.310(c)(5)]. A

copy of the denial letter is in the docket of this matter.

    Issued on: June 17, 2015.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-15519 Filed 6-23-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 199 (Friday, October 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71173-71176]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24960]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-2000-7165; FMCSA-2000-8398; FMCSA-
2001-11426; FMCSA-2002-11714; FMCSA-2002-12294; FMCSA-2004-17195;
FMCSA-2004-17984; FMCSA-2004-18885; FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2006-23773;
FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-2007-0071; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2008-0106;
FMCSA-2008-0174; FMCSA-2008-0231; FMCSA-2008-0266; FMCSA-2009-0303;
FMCSA-2010-0082; FMCSA-2010-0114; FMCSA-2010-0161; FMCSA-2010-0187;
FMCSA-2010-0385; FMCSA-2011-0366; FMCSA-2011-0379; FMCSA-2011-0380;
FMCSA-2012-0040; FMCSA-2012-0160; FMCSA-2012-0161; FMCSA-2012-0214;
FMCSA-2012-0215; FMCSA-2012-0216; FMCSA-2013-0167; FMCSA-2013-0169;
FMCSA-2013-0170; FMCSA-2013-0174; FMCSA-2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0004;
FMCSA-2014-0005; FMCSA-2014-0006; FMCSA-2014-0007; FMCSA-2014-0010;
FMCSA-2014-0011; FMCSA-2014-0296]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

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

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

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

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions are effective from the dates
stated in the discussions below. Comments must be received on or before
November 14, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: [Docket No. FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-
2000-7165; FMCSA-2000-8398; FMCSA-2001-11426; FMCSA-2002-11714; FMCSA-
2002-12294; FMCSA-2004-17195; FMCSA-2004-17984; FMCSA-2004-18885;
FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2006-23773; FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-2007-0071;
FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2008-0106; FMCSA-2008-0174; FMCSA-2008-0231;
FMCSA-2008-0266; FMCSA-2009-0303; FMCSA-2010-0082; FMCSA-2010-0114;
FMCSA-2010-0161; FMCSA-2010-0187; FMCSA-2010-0385; FMCSA-2011-0366;
FMCSA-2011-0379; FMCSA-2011-0380; FMCSA-2012-0040; FMCSA-2012-0160;
FMCSA-2012-0161; FMCSA-2012-0214; FMCSA-2012-0215; FMCSA-2012-0216;
FMCSA-2013-0167; FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-2013-0170; FMCSA-2013-0174;
FMCSA-2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0004; FMCSA-2014-0005; FMCSA-2014-0006;
FMCSA-2014-0007; FMCSA-2014-0010; FMCSA-2014-0011; FMCSA-2014-0296],
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on January
17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

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

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 125 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 125 applications for renewal on their merits and
decided to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. Each
individual is identified according to the renewal date.

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

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. The following group(s) of
drivers will receive renewed exemptions effective in the month of
October and are discussed below.
    As of October 6, 2016, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 58 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (65 FR
20245; 65 FR 57230; 67 FR 15662; 67 FR 37907; 67 FR 46016; 67 FR 57266;
67 FR 57627; 69 FR 17263; 69 FR 26206; 69 FR 26921; 69 FR 31447; 69 FR
51346; 69 FR 52741; 70 FR 48797; 70 FR 61493; 71 FR 19602; 71 FR 26602;
71 FR 27033; 71 FR 27034; 71 FR 32183; 71 FR 41310; 71 FR 6826; 71 FR
50970; 71 FR 53489; 72 FR 39879; 72 FR 52419; 73 FR 6242; 73 FR 6244;
73 FR 16950; 73 FR 16952; 73 FR 27018; 73 FR 35194; 73 FR 35200; 73 FR
36955; 73 FR 38498; 73 FR 48270; 73 FR 48273; 73 FR 48275; 73 FR 51336;
73 FR 75807; 74 FR 41971; 74 FR 60022; 75 FR 4623; 75 FR 22179; 75 FR
25918; 75 FR 27622; 75 FR 34209; 75 FR 34211; 75 FR 36778; 75 FR 36779;
75 FR 39725; 75 FR 44050; 75 FR 44051; 75 FR 47886; 75 FR 47888; 75 FR
52062; 75 FR 61833; 75 FR 77942; 76 FR 5425; 76 FR 54530; 77 FR 5874;
77 FR 15184; 77 FR 17109; 77 FR 17117; 77 FR 23797; 77 FR 23799; 77 FR
26816; 77 FR 27845; 77 FR 27850; 77 FR 33558; 77 FR 36338; 77 FR 38381;
77 FR 38384; 77 FR 40945; 70 FR 40946; 77 FR 41879; 77 FR 46153; 77 FR
46793; 77 FR 51846; 77 FR 52388; 77 FR 52389; 77 FR 52391; 77 FR 56262;
77 FR 59245; 78 FR 64271; 78 FR 64274; 78 FR 67454; 78 FR 77778; 78 FR
78477; 79 FR 4803; 79 FR 1908; 79 FR 2748; 79 FR 14333; 79 FR 14571; 79
FR 18392; 79 FR 23797; 79 FR 27365; 79 FR 27681; 79 FR 28588; 79 FR
29498; 79 FR 35212; 79 FR 35218; 79 FR 35220; 79 FR 37842; 79 FR 38649;
79 FR 38659; 79 FR 38661; 79 FR 40945; 79 FR 40945; 79 FR 41735; 79 FR
41740; 79 FR 45868; 79 FR 46153; 79 FR 46300; 79 FR 47175; 79 FR 51642;
79 FR 51643; 79 FR 52388; 79 FR 53514; 79 FR 64001):

Ramon Adame (IL)
Thomas A. Black (MO)
John E. Breslin (NV)
Trixie L. Brown (IN)
Joel W. Bryant (LA)
Howard T. Bubel (ND)
Raymond E. Burrus (CO)
Bradley E. Buzzell (NH)
Dionicio Carrera (TX)
Scott F. Chalfant (DE)
Tommy J. Cross, Jr. (TN)
Tony K. Ellis (IN)
Curtis E. Firari (WI)
Kelly L. Foster (UT)
Donald H. Fuller (NY)
Viktor V. Goluda (SC)
Ronald M. Green (OH)
David W. Grooms (IN)
Clifford J. Harris (VA)
Billy R. Holdman (IL)
Daniel Hollins (KY)
Ralph E. Holmes (MD)
Charles S. Huffman (KS)
Fredrick C. Ingles (WV)
Daniel W. Johnson (NY)
Matthew B. Lairamore (OK)
Terry A. Legates (OK)
Gary McKown (WV)
Ronald S. Milkowski (NJ)
Donald L. Minney (OH)
Jack W. Murphy, Jr. (OH)
Danny W. Nuckles (VA)
Nathan J. Price (ID)
Matias P. Quintanilla (CA)
Jacques W. Rainville (VT)
Antonio A. Ribeiro (CT)
Ronney L. Rogers (WA)
David T. Rueckert (WA)
Kirk Scott (CT)
Ronald H. Sieg (MO)
Kenneth D. Sisk (NC)
David L. Slack (TX)
David M. Smith (IL)
Mark A. Smith (IA)
Scotty W. Sparks (KY)
Robert L. Strange (NC)
Charles E. Stokes (FL)
Samuel M. Stoltzfus (PA)
George W. Thomas (SC)
Malcolm J. Tilghman, Sr. (DE)
Duane L. Tysseling (IA)
Melvin V. Van Meter (PA)
Nicholas J. Vance (OH)
Christopher M. Vincent (NC)
Scott C. Westphal (MN)
Dale E. Williams (TX)
Robert D. Williams (LA)
Michael T. Wimber (MT)

    The drivers were included in one of the following dockets: Docket
Nos. FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-2002-11714; FMCSA-2002-12294; FMCSA-2004-
17195; FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2006-23773; FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-
2007-0071; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2008-0106; FMCSA-2008-0174; FMCSA-
2009-0303; FMCSA-2010-0082; FMCSA-2010-0114; FMCSA-2010-0161; FMCSA-
2010-0385; FMCSA-2011-0366; FMCSA-2011-0379; FMCSA-2011-0380; FMCSA-
2012-0040; FMCSA-2012-0160; FMCSA-2012-0161; FMCSA-2012-0214; FMCSA-
2013-0167; FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-2013-0170; FMCSA-2013-0174; FMCSA-
2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0004; FMCSA-2014-0005; FMCSA-2014-0006; FMCSA-
2014-0007; FMCSA-2014-0010. Their exemptions are effective as of
October 6, 2016 and will expire on October 6, 2018.
    As of October 15, 2016, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 17 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (67 FR
10471; 67 FR 19798; 69 FR 33997; 69 FR 51346; 69 FR 61292; 71 FR 50970;
71 FR 55820; 73 FR 38497; 73 FR 46973; 73 FR 48270; 73 FR 48271; 73 FR
54888; 73 FR 65009; 75 FR 39725; 75 FR 44050; 75 FR 47883; 75 FR 50799;
75 FR 52063; 75 FR 57105; 75 FR 61833; 75 FR 63257; 77 FR 38381; 77 FR
48590; 77 FR 51846; 77 FR 52388; 77 FR 60010):

William C. Ball (NC)
Julian Collins (GA)
Ivory Davis (MD)
Timothy J. Droeger (MN)
Edward P. Hynes II (VA)
Richard L. Kelley (MN)
Theodore Kirby (MD)
Kelly R. Konesky (AZ)
Joseph A. Leigh, Jr. (NC)
Hollis J. Martin (AL)
Kevin C. Palmer (OR)
Charles O. Rhodes (FL)
Gordon G. Roth (KS)
Julius Simmons, Jr. (SC)
Ted L. Smeltzer (IN)
Stephen B. Whitt (NC)

Darrell F. Woosley (IL)

    The drivers were included in one of the following dockets: Docket
No. FMCSA-2001-11426; FMCSA-2004-17984; FMCSA-2008-0174; FMCSA-2008-
0321; FMCSA-2010-0161; FMCSA-2010-0187; FMCSA-2012-0160. Their
exemptions are effective as of October 15, 2016 and will expire on
October 15, 2018.
    As of October 21, 2016, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 7 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (79 FR
56099; 79 FR 70928):

Terry L. Allen (IL)
Todd A. Carlson (MN)
Ronald Gaines (FL)
Russel K. Gray (OH)
Billy R. Hampton (NC)
Raymond Holt (CA)
Juan C. Puente (TX)

    The drivers were included on the following docket: Docket No.
FMCSA-2014-0011. Their exemptions are effective as of October 21, 2016
and will expire on October 21, 2018.
    As of October 22, 2016, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 8 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (73 FR
35194; 73 FR 51689; 73 FR 63047; 75 FR 39725; 75 FR 47883; 75 FR 61883;
75 FR 63257; 75 FR 64396; 77 FR 64582; 79 FR 56104):

Randall J. Denson (MN)
James D. Drabek, Jr. (IL)
Delone W. Dudley (MD)
James W. Lappan (KS)
Jeromy W. Leatherman (PA)
Ernest B. Martin (KY)
Mark L. McWhorter (FL)
Sylvester Silver (VA)

    The drivers were included on the following docket: Docket No.
FMCSA-2008-0106; FMCSA-2008-0266; FMCSA-2010-0161; FMCSA-2010-0187.
Their exemptions are effective as of October 22, 2016 and will expire
on October 22, 2018.
    As of October 23, 2016, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 7 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (77 FR
52381; 77 FR 64841; 79 FR 56097):

Ronald A. Duester (TX)
Charlene E. Geary (SD)
David N. Hinchliffe (TX)
Michael C. Hoff (WA)
Benny L. Sanchez (CA)
Sandeep Singh (CA)
James T. Stalker (OH)

    The drivers were included on the following docket: Docket No.
FMCSA-2012-0215. Their exemptions are effective as of October 23, 2016
and will expire on October 23, 2018.
    As of October 27, 2016, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 10 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (65 FR
33406; 65 FR 57234; 65 FR 78256; 66 FR 16311; 67 FR 57266; 69 FR 52741;
69 FR 53493; 69 FR 62742; 71 FR 53489; 71 FR 62148; 73 FR 61925; 75 FR
59327; 77 FR 64583; 79 FR 56117):

David W. Brown (TN)
Monty G. Calderon (OH)
Awilda S. Colon (TN)
Zane G. Harvey, Jr. (VA)
Jeffrey M. Keyser (OH)
Donnie A. Kildow (ID)
David G. Meyers (NY)
Rodney M. Pegg (PA)
Zbigniew P. Pietranik (WI)
Joseph F. Wood (MS)

    The drivers were included on the following docket: Docket No.
FMCSA-2000-7165; FMCSA-2000-8398; FMCSA-2004-18885. Their exemptions
are effective as of October 27, 2016 and will expire on October 27,
2018.
    As of October 31, 2016, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 18 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (77 FR
56261; 77 FR 65933; 79 FR 58856; 79 FR 59348; 79 FR 72754):

Richard J. Beck (IL)
Donald L. Blakeley II (NV)
Marty R. Brewsteer (KS)
Henry L. Chrestensen (IA)
Sanford L. Goodwin (TX)
Tonia L. Graves (AZ)
Roger S. Hardin (AL)
Gregory S. Hatten (LA)
Thomas J. Long III (PA)
Matthew J. Mantooth (KY)
Thomas J. McClure (IA)
Steven W. Miller (PA)
James J. Monticello (IN)
Aaron F. Naylor (PA)
Klifford N. Siemens (KS)
Steven R. Smith (ID)
Scott E. Tussey (KY)
Aaron H. Walser (ID)

    The drivers were included on the following docket: Docket No.
FMCSA-2012-0216; FMCSA-2014-0296. Their exemptions are effective as of
October 31, 2016 and will expire on October 31, 2018.
    Each of the 125 applicants listed in the groups above has requested
renewal of the exemption and has submitted evidence showing that the
vision in the better eye continues to meet the requirement specified at
49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is stable. In
addition, a review of each record of safety while driving with the
respective vision deficiencies over the past two years indicates each
applicant continues to meet the vision exemption requirements.
    These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each
renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by November 14, 2016.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 125 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will

take immediate steps to revoke the exemption of a driver.

Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket numbers FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-
2000-7165; FMCSA-2000-8398; FMCSA-2001-11426; FMCSA-2002-11714; FMCSA-
2002-12294; FMCSA-2004-17195; FMCSA-2004-17984; FMCSA-2004-18885;
FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2006-23773; FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-2007-0071;
FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2008-0106; FMCSA-2008-0174; FMCSA-2008-0231;
FMCSA-2008-0266; FMCSA-2009-0303; FMCSA-2010-0082; FMCSA-2010-0114;
FMCSA-2010-0161; FMCSA-2010-0187; FMCSA-2010-0385; FMCSA-2011-0366;
FMCSA-2011-0379; FMCSA-2011-0380; FMCSA-2012-0040; FMCSA-2012-0160;
FMCSA-2012-0161; FMCSA-2012-0214; FMCSA-2012-0215; FMCSA-2012-0216;
FMCSA-2013-0167; FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-2013-0170; FMCSA-2013-0174;
FMCSA-2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0004; FMCSA-2014-0005; FMCSA-2014-0006;
FMCSA-2014-0007; FMCSA-2014-0010; FMCSA-2014-0011; FMCSA-2014-0296 and
click the search button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue
``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand side of the page. On the new
page, enter information required including the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the
close of the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert
the docket number FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-2000-7165; FMCSA-2000-8398;
FMCSA-2001-11426; FMCSA-2002-11714; FMCSA-2002-12294; FMCSA-2004-17195;
FMCSA-2004-17984; FMCSA-2004-18885; FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2006-23773;
FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-2007-0071; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2008-0106;
FMCSA-2008-0174; FMCSA-2008-0231; FMCSA-2008-0266; FMCSA-2009-0303;
FMCSA-2010-0082; FMCSA-2010-0114; FMCSA-2010-0161; FMCSA-2010-0187;
FMCSA-2010-0385; FMCSA-2011-0366; FMCSA-2011-0379; FMCSA-2011-0380;
FMCSA-2012-0040; FMCSA-2012-0160; FMCSA-2012-0161; FMCSA-2012-0214;
FMCSA-2012-0215; FMCSA-2012-0216; FMCSA-2013-0167; FMCSA-2013-0169;
FMCSA-2013-0170; FMCSA-2013-0174; FMCSA-2014-0003; FMCSA-2014-0004;
FMCSA-2014-0005; FMCSA-2014-0006; FMCSA-2014-0007; FMCSA-2014-0010;
FMCSA-2014-0011; FMCSA-2014-0296 and click ``Search.'' Next, click
``Open Docket Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments
related to this notice.

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-24960 Filed 10-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 95 (Thursday, May 16, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28851-28852]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11632]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0519]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Guidance for Industry on How To Submit Information in
Electronic Format to Center for Veterinary Medicine Using the Food and
Drug Administration's Electronic Submission Gateway

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on the existing reporting
requests in CVM Guidance 108, ``How to Register with the CVM
Electronic Submission System to Submit Information in Electronic Format
using the FDA Electronic Submissions Gateway.''

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by July 15, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments on the collection of information
to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the
collection of

information to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and
Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
All comments should be identified with the docket number found in
brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonna Capezzuto, Office of Information
Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400B,
Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Guidance for Industry 108 on How To Submit Information in
Electronic Format to CVM Using the FDA Electronic Submission Gateway--
21 CFR 11.2 (OMB Control Number 0910-0454)--Extension

    CVM accepts certain types of submissions electronically with no
requirement for a paper copy. These types of documents are listed in
public docket 97S-0251 as required by 21 CFR 11.2. CVM's ability to
receive and process information submitted electronically is limited by
its current information technology capabilities and the requirements of
the Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures final regulation. CVM's
guidance entitled ``Guidance for Industry 108: How to Submit
Information in Electronic Format to CVM Using the FDA Electronic
Submission Gateway'' outlines general standards to be used for the
submission of any information by email. The likely respondents are
sponsors for new animal drug applications.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                  Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Number of
   21 CFR Part and form FDA       Number of     responses per   Total annual    Average burden     Total hours
                                 respondents     respondent       responses      per response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   11.2; Form FDA 3538...              65             2.4             156  0.08 (5 minutes)  13 (Rounded
                                                                                from 12.5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    Dated: May 10, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-11632 Filed 5-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: March 25, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 56)]
[Notices]
[Page 12876]
[DOCID:fr25mr09-121]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2007-0008]

National Advisory Council Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of the National Advisory Committee Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the date, time, location, and agenda for
the next meeting of the National Advisory Council (NAC). At the
meeting, the subcommittees will report on their work since the December
10-11, 2008 meeting. This meeting will be open to the public.

DATES: Meeting Dates: Wednesday, April 15, 2009, from approximately 10
a.m. to 5:15 p.m. and Thursday, April 16, 2009, 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
A public comment period will take place on the afternoon of April 16,
2009, between approximately 2:30 p.m. and 3 p.m.
    Comment Date: Persons wishing to make an oral presentation, or who
are unable to attend or speak at the meeting, may submit written
comments. Written comments or requests to make oral presentations must
be received by April 6, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Washington Court Hotel, 525 New
Jersey Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20001. Written comments and requests
to make oral presentations at the meeting should be provided to the
address listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section and must
be received by April 6, 2009. All submissions received must include the
Docket ID FEMA-2007-0008 and may be submitted by any one of the
following methods:
    Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
instructions for submitting comments on the Web site.
    E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Include Docket ID FEMA-2007-0008 in the
subject line of the message.
    Facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Mail: Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency,
Room 835, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.
    Hand Delivery/Courier: Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Room 835, 500 C Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20472.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
FEMA-2007-0008. Comments received also will be posted without
alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read documents or comments
received by the National Advisory Council, go to http://
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alyson Price, Designated Federal
Officer, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., (Room
718), Washington, DC 20472, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The NAC Web site is located at: http://
www.fema.gov/about/nac/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Notice of this meeting is required under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 1 et
seq.). The National Advisory Council (NAC) will meet for the purpose of
reviewing the progress and/or potential recommendations of the
following NAC subcommittees: Stafford Act, National Response Framework,
National Incident Management System, Post-Disaster Housing, Special
Needs, and Public/Private Partnerships. The council will receive an
update on the Regional Advisory Councils, transition issues, and other
matters.
    Public Attendance: The meeting is open to the public. Please note
that the meeting may adjourn early if all business is finished. Persons
with disabilities who require special assistance should advise the
Designated Federal Officer of their anticipated special needs as early
as possible. Members of the public who wish to make comments on
Thursday, April 16, 2009 between 2:30 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. are requested
to register in advance, and must be present and seated by 1 pm. Please
note that this time may change slightly if the meeting adjourns early.
In order to allow as many people as possible to speak, speakers are
requested to limit their remarks to 3 minutes. For those wishing to
submit written comments, please follow the procedure noted above.

    Dated: March 13, 2009.
Nancy Ward,
Acting Administrator,Federal Emergency Management Agency.
 [FR Doc. E9-6712 Filed 3-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-48-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 9, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50652-50655]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21777]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RD18-7-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-725R); Comment
Request; Revision

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Comment request.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) is submitting its information collection FERC-725R (Mandatory
Reliability Standards: BAL Reliability Standards) to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review of the information collection
requirements. Any interested person may file comments with the
Commission as explained below.
    The North American Electric Reliability Corporation submitted a
petition (on August 17, 2018) requesting Commission approval of
proposed Reliability Standard BAL-002-3 and the retirement of currently
effective Reliability Standard BAL-002-2. On August 24, 2018, the
Commission issued a Notice in the Federal Register requesting public
comment on the petition and proposed changes (which would affect the
FERC-725R) The Commission received no comments and is making this
notation in its submittal of the FERC-725R to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by December
10, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to the Commission, in Docket No.
RD18-7-000 by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's website: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at [email protected], or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
[email protected], by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by fax at
(202) 273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-725R, Mandatory Reliability Standards: BAL Reliability
Standards.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0268.
    Type of Request: Revision to FERC-725R information collection
requirements, as discussed in Docket No. RD18-7-000.

    Abstract: On August 17, 2018, the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC) filed a petition seeking approval of
proposed Reliability Standard BAL-002-3 (Disturbance Control Standard--
Contingency Reserve for Recovery from a Balancing Contingency Event)
and the retirement of currently-effective Reliability Standard BAL-002-
2. NERC submitted proposed Reliability Standard BAL-002-3 in response
to the Commission's directive in Order No. 835 to develop modifications
to Reliability Standard BAL-002-2, Requirement R1 to require balancing
authorities or reserve sharing groups: (1) To notify the reliability
coordinator of the conditions set forth in Requirement R1, Part 1.3.1
preventing it from complying with the 15-minute ACE recovery period;
and (2) to provide the reliability coordinator with its ACE recovery
plan, including a target recovery time.\1\ The NERC petition states
``the proposed modifications to Reliability Standard BAL-002-3 also
intend to clarify that communication with the reliability coordinator
(RC) should proceed in accordance with Energy Emergency Alert
procedures within the EOP Reliability Standards.\2\ This communication
is done under the currently-effective Reliability Standard BAL-002-2.
The communications (and related burden) are already required, and the
additional information is de minimis. Therefore the Commission is not
modifying the burden estimate and is submitting this to OMB as non-
material or non-substantive change to a currently approved collection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Disturbance Control Standard--Contingency Reserve for
Recovery from a Balancing Contingency Event Reliability Standard,
Order No. 835, 158 FERC ] 61,030, at P 37 (2017).
    \2\ NERC Petition at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office of Electric Reliability approved the NERC proposal in a
Delegated Order on September 25, 2018.
    Type of Respondents: Balancing authorities and reserve sharing
groups.
    Estimate of Annual Burden \3\: According to the NERC Compliance
Registry as of 8/24/2018, there are 99 balancing authorities in the
United States. The Commission bases individual burden estimates on the
time needed for balancing authorities to develop tools needed to
facilitate reporting that are required in the Reliability Standard.
These burden estimates are consistent with estimates for similar tasks
in other Commission-approved Reliability Standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Burden is defined as 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. For
further explanation of information collection burden, refer to 5
Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.
    \4\ Reliability Standard BAL-002-2 applies to balancing
authorities and reserve sharing groups. However, the burden
associated with the balancing authorities complying with
Requirements R1 and R3 is not included in this table because that
burden doesn't change and the Commission already accounted for it
under Commission-approved Reliability Standard BAL-002-1.
    \5\ The estimated hourly cost (wages plus benefits) is based on
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) information (available at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm and, for benefits, https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). The hourly cost (wages plus
benefits) for developing and maintaining operating process and plans
is $105.29 and is an average for an electrical engineer (Occupation
code 17-2071, $66.90/hour) and Legal (Occupation code 23-0000, $
$143.68). The hourly cost (wages plus benefits) for record retention
is $39.68 for information and record clerks (Occupation code 43-
4199).
    \6\ BA = Balancing Authority; RSG = Reserve Sharing Group.
    \7\ This figure of 8 hours/response is an average of the hourly
burden per response for Years 1-3. Year 1 burden: 12 hours per
response; Years 2-3, each: 6 hours/response. The average annual
burden for Years 1-3 is 8 hours/response (or [12 hours + 6 hours + 6
hours] / 3).

 FERC-725R, As Modified by RM16-7-000 Final Rule (BAL-002-2: Disturbance Control Standard--Contingency Reserve for Recovery From a Balancing Contingency
                                                                       Event) 4 5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Annual number                                             Total annual burden
                                           Number of     of responses    Total number    Average burden hours &    hours & total annual      Cost per
                                          respondents   per respondent   of responses    cost per response ($)      cost ($) (rounded)    respondent ($)
                                                   (1)             (2)     (1) * (2) =  (4)....................  (3) * (4) = (5)........       (5) / (1)
                                                                                (3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BA/RSG: \6\ Develop and Maintain                    99               1              99  8 \7\ hrs.; $842.32....  792 hrs.; $83,390......         $842.32
 annually, Operating Process and
 Operating Plans.
BA/RSG: Record Retention..............              99               1              99  4 hrs.; $158.72........  396 hrs.; $15,713......          158.72
                                       -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    TOTAL.............................  ..............  ..............             198  .......................  1,188 hrs.; $99,103....  ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: September 28, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-21777 Filed 10-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P