[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 15, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9812-9816]
[FR Doc No: 2023-03198]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0035; FRL-10594-01-R9]

Finding of Failure To Attain the 1987 24-Hour PM10 Standards;
Pinal County, Arizona

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
determine

that the West Pinal County, Arizona nonattainment area did not attain
the 1987 24-hour national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or
``standards'') for particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micrometers
or smaller (PM10) by its December 31, 2022 ``Serious'' area
attainment date. This proposal is based on the EPA's calculation of the
preliminary PM10 design value for the nonattainment area
over the 2020-2022 period. If the EPA makes a final determination that
West Pinal County has failed to attain the PM10 NAAQS by its
attainment date, the State will be required to submit a revision to the
Arizona state implementation plan (SIP) that, among other elements,
provides for expeditious attainment of the PM10 standards
and for a five percent annual reduction in the emissions of direct
PM10 or a PM10 plan precursor pollutant in the
nonattainment area.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by March 17, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2023-0035 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a
language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ashley Graham, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105,
(415) 972-3877, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Regulatory Context
    A. The 1987 PM10 NAAQS
    B. History of the West Pinal County Nonattainment Area
II. Proposed Determination and Associated Rationale
    A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
    B. Monitoring Network Review, Quality Assurance, and Data
Completeness
    C. The EPA's Evaluation of Attainment
III. Consequences for a Serious PM10 Nonattainment Area
Failing To Attain the Standards by the Attainment Date
IV. Summary of Our Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Regulatory Context

A. The 1987 PM10 NAAQS

    The EPA sets the NAAQS for certain ambient air pollutants,
including particulate matter, at levels required to protect public
health and welfare. For a given air pollutant, ``primary'' NAAQS are
those determined by the EPA as requisite to protect public health,
allowing an adequate margin of safety, and ``secondary'' standards are
those determined by the EPA as requisite to protect public welfare from
any known or anticipated adverse effects associated with the presence
of such air pollutant in the ambient air.\1\ The EPA revised the
primary and secondary NAAQS for particulate matter on July 1, 1987,
replacing standards for total suspended particulates with annual and
24-hour standards.\2\ An area attains the 24-hour PM10
primary and secondary standards of 150 micrograms per cubic meter
([mu]g/m\3\) when the expected number of days per calendar year with a
24-hour concentration exceeding the standards (referred to as an
``exceedance'') over a three-year period is equal to or less than
one.\3\ The annual PM10 standards were revoked on October
17, 2006.\4\ Therefore, we refer herein to the 1987 24-hour
PM10 standards as the ``PM10 NAAQS.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ CAA section 109(b).
    \2\ 52 FR 24634.
    \3\ An exceedance is defined as a daily value that is above the
level of the 24-hour standards, 150 [mu]g/m\3\, after rounding to
the nearest 10 [mu]g/m\3\ (i.e., values ending in five or greater
are to be rounded up). Consequently, a recorded value of 154 [mu]g/
m\3\ would not be an exceedance because it would be rounded to 150
[mu]g/m\3\; whereas, a recorded value of 155 [mu]g/m\3\ would be an
exceedance because it would be rounded to 160 [mu]g/m\3\. See 40 CFR
50.6 and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix K, section 1.0.
    \4\ 71 FR 61144.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. History of the West Pinal County Nonattainment Area

    On May 31, 2012, the EPA designated a portion of state lands in
Pinal County, Arizona (``West Pinal County'') as nonattainment for the
1987 PM10 NAAQS based on 2006-2008 data.\5\ As a result of
the nonattainment designation, West Pinal County was classified as a
``Moderate'' PM10 nonattainment area with an attainment date
of as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than December 31,
2018. The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) submitted
a SIP revision intended to meet Moderate PM10 nonattainment
requirements on December 21, 2015 (``2015 West Pinal Plan'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 77 FR 32024. The boundaries for the West Pinal County
PM10 nonattainment area are described in 40 CFR 81.303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 24, 2020, the EPA determined that West Pinal County did not
attain the 1987 PM10 NAAQS by December 31, 2018.\6\ Pursuant
to 188(b)(2), the area was reclassified to ``Serious'' nonattainment
with an attainment date of as expeditiously as practicable, but no
later than December 31, 2022.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 85 FR 37756.
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 8, 2021, the EPA proposed to disapprove the 2015 West
Pinal Plan.\8\ In response to the EPA's January 8, 2021 proposal, on
May 17, 2021, ADEQ withdrew the 2015 West Pinal Plan, with the
exception of several rules and statutes that had been approved into the
SIP in 2017.\9\ Consequently, the EPA did not finalize the actions
proposed on January 8, 2021, with respect to the Moderate area plan
requirements. Instead, on July 23, 2021, the EPA found that Arizona had
failed to submit a plan to address these requirements.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 86 FR 1347.
    \9\ Letter dated May 17, 2021, from Daniel Czecholinski,
Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ, to Deborah Jordan, Acting
Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, Subject: ``RE: Withdrawal
from EPA Consideration of the 2015 Arizona State Implementation Plan
Revision: West Pinal County PM10 Nonattainment Area.''
    \10\ 86 FR 38928.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 31, 2022, ADEQ adopted and submitted the ``2022 Serious Area
Particulate Plan for PM-10 for the West Pinal County Nonattainment
Area'' (``2022 West Pinal Plan'' or ``Plan''),\11\ as

a revision to the Arizona SIP.\12\ In addition to addressing the
Moderate and Serious area plan requirements, the 2022 West Pinal Plan
included a request for an extension of the December 31, 2022 attainment
date pursuant to Clean Air Act (CAA) section 188(e). On November 30,
2022, the EPA issued a letter finding the 2022 West Pinal Plan complete
under CAA section 110(k).\13\ However, the EPA has not approved the
Plan or the attainment date extension request. Therefore, the maximum
Serious area attainment date for West Pinal County remains December 31,
2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ West Pinal PM10 Plan, Appendix E, Exhibit 2,
Resolution to Adopt the 2022 Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM-10
for the West Pinal County Nonattainment Area.
    \12\ Letter dated May 31, 2022, from Daniel Czecholinski,
Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ, to Martha Guzman, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX, Subject: ``Arizona State
Implementation Plan Revision, Maricopa Association of Governments
2022 Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM-10 for the West Pinal
County Nonattainment Area.''
    \13\ Letter dated November 30, 2022, from Elizabeth J. Adams,
Director, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IX, to Misael
Cabrera, Director, ADEQ, Subject: ``Completeness Finding for State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Submission for West Pinal County for the
1987 PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and Termination of Clean Air Act (CAA) Sanctions Clocks.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Proposed Determination and Associated Rationale

A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions

    Sections 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) of the CAA require the EPA to
determine whether a PM10 nonattainment area attained by the
applicable attainment date, based on the area's air quality ``as of the
attainment date.'' Generally, this determination of whether an area's
air quality meets the PM10 standards is based upon the most
recent three years of complete, certified data gathered at eligible
monitoring sites in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.\14\ The
requirements of 40 CFR part 58 include quality assurance procedures for
monitor operation and data handling, siting parameters for instruments
or instrument probes, and minimum ambient air quality monitoring
network requirements. State, local, or tribal agencies operating air
monitoring sites, in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, must enter the
ambient air quality data and associated quality assurance data from
these sites into the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database.\15\ These
monitoring agencies certify annually that these data are accurate to
the best of their knowledge, taking into consideration the quality
assurance findings.\16\ Accordingly, the EPA relies primarily on AQS
data when determining the attainment status of an area. In determining
whether data are suitable for regulatory determinations, the EPA uses a
``weight of evidence'' approach, considering the requirements of 40 CFR
part 58, Appendix A, and other documentation demonstrating overall
compliance with part 58.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 40 CFR part 50, Appendix K, section 2.3(a).
    \15\ 40 CFR 58.16. AQS is the EPA's national repository of
ambient air quality data.
    \16\ 40 CFR 58.15(a).
    \17\ 40 CFR part 58, Appendix A, section 1.2.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ambient air quality data must generally meet data completeness
requirements for each year under consideration. The completeness
requirements are met when at least 75 percent of the scheduled sampling
days for each quarter have valid data.\18\ The data requirements for
showing that a monitor has failed an attainment test, and thus recorded
a violation of the PM10 standards, are less stringent and
the 75 percent data capture requirement does not apply provided there
are sufficient data to unambiguously establish nonattainment of the
standards.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 40 CFR part 50, Appendix K, section 2.3.
    \19\ 40 CFR part 50, Appendix K, section 2.3(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ambient air quality data that meet the applicable requirements are
used to calculate design values, which can be compared to the NAAQS.
The expected number of exceedances averaged over a three-year period at
any given monitor is known as the PM10 design value for that
site. The PM10 design value for the nonattainment area is
the highest design value from a monitor within that area. The
methodologies for calculating expected exceedances for the
PM10 NAAQS are found in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix K, section
2.1(a).

B. Monitoring Network Review, Quality Assurance, and Data Completeness

    The Pinal County Air Quality Control District (``Pinal County'') is
the governmental agency with the authority and responsibilities under
the State's laws for collecting ambient air quality data for West Pinal
County. Pinal County submits annual monitoring network plans to the
EPA.\20\ These plans discuss the status of the ambient air monitoring
network, as required under 40 CFR part 58. The EPA reviews these annual
network plans for compliance with specific requirements in 40 CFR part
58. With respect to PM10, the EPA has found that the annual
network plans submitted by Pinal County meet these requirements,
including minimum monitoring requirements.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ We have included Pinal County's annual monitoring network
plans for the relevant years in the docket for this action.
    \21\ We have included the EPA's letters acting on Pinal County's
annual monitoring network plans in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with 40 CFR 58.15, Pinal County certifies annually
that the previous year's ambient concentration and quality assurance
data are completely submitted to AQS and that the ambient concentration
data are accurate, taking into consideration the quality assurance
findings.\22\ Along with the certification letters, Pinal County
submits a summary of the precision and accuracy data for all ambient
air quality data.\23\ The deadlines for submission of quarter 4
(October through December) data and certification of the 2022 data have
not yet passed and these data have not yet been submitted and
certified. The 2022 data are therefore considered incomplete and
preliminary at the time of this proposal. However, we do not expect the
final certified data to differ significantly from the data reflected in
this proposal. Moreover, even if the 2022 data were to differ
significantly from the preliminary data, the end result would be the
same, as explained further in section II.C of this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ We have included Pinal County's annual data certifications
for 2020 and 2021 in the docket for this action.
    \23\ See 40 CFR 58.15(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA AQS Design Value Report includes a validity indicator that
reflects whether the design value is valid (i.e., calculated using data
that meet the applicable completeness criteria). For the purposes of
this proposal, we reviewed the data for the 2020-2022 period for
completeness and determined that, with the exception of the 2022
quarter 4 data that have not yet been submitted to AQS, the
PM10 data collected by Pinal County meet the 75 percent
completeness criterion at the relevant monitoring sites.
    Finally, the EPA conducts regular technical systems audits (TSAs)
where we review and inspect state and local ambient air monitoring
programs to assess compliance with applicable regulations concerning
the collection, analysis, validation, and reporting of ambient air
quality data. For the purposes of this proposal, we reviewed the
findings from the EPA's 2019 TSA of Pinal County's ambient air
monitoring program.\24\ None of the findings from the 2019 TSA were
cause for invalidation of any data from the relevant monitors.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ EPA Region IX, Technical Systems Audit of the Ambient Air
Monitoring Program: Pinal County Air Quality Control District, April
1-3, 2019 (Final Report dated September 2019).
    \25\ Id. We note that in September 2022, the EPA conducted a
subsequent TSA for Pinal County. We have not yet completed the
report summarizing the findings from the September 2022 TSA;
however, based on our preliminary review, none of the findings would
affect our proposed determination herein that the West Pinal County
area did not attain by the December 31, 2022 Serious area attainment
date.

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

    In summary, based on the relevant monitoring network plans,
certifications, and 2019 TSA, we propose to find that the
PM10 data collected at the West Pinal monitoring sites are
suitable for determining whether West Pinal County attained the
PM10 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.

C. The EPA's Evaluation of Attainment

    Table 1 provides the estimated number of PM10
exceedances in each of the years 2020-2022, and preliminary 2022
p.m.10 design values expressed as a single value
representing the average expected exceedances over the three-year
period, 2020-2022, for all regulatory monitoring sites measuring
PM10 within West Pinal County. As discussed in section II.B,
2022 quarter 4 data are not yet available in AQS; thus, those data are
not reflected in the table. The PM10 data show that the
design values at multiple monitoring sites are greater than 1.0
estimated annual average exceedance of the 1987 24-hour PM10
NAAQS. Moreover, while preliminary 2022 data in AQS indicate
exceedances at several sites (as shown in Table 1), even if there were
zero exceedances in 2022, the 2020-2022 design value would exceed 1.0
at multiple monitoring sites. Consequently, the EPA proposes to
determine, based upon complete and quality-assured 2020 and 2021 data
and preliminary 2022 data, that West Pinal County did not attain the
1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of
December 31, 2022.

               Table 1--2020-2022 PM10 Estimated Exceedances for the West Pinal Nonattainment Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              PM10 estimated exceedances
                                                                     -------------------------------------------
                 Monitoring site                     AQS site ID #                                     2020-2022
                                                                         2020       2021      2022 *       *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Casa Grande Downtown............................       04-021-0001-3        1.2          2          0        1.1
Stanfield.......................................       04-021-3008-3          4          4          2        3.3
Combs...........................................       04-021-3009-3          0          1          0        0.3
Pinal County Housing (aka Eleven Mile Corner)...       04-021-3011-3          1          3          0        1.3
Eloy............................................       04-021-3014-3        2.2          3          0        1.7
Hidden Valley...................................       04-021-3015-3       59.6         24       14.1       32.6
Maricopa 1405...................................       04-021-3016-3          3          2          1          2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: EPA AQS Design Value Report, AMP 480, dated January 5, 2023. (User ID: JCARLSTAD, Report Request ID:
  2069517).
* PM10 estimated exceedances for 2022 reflect quarters 1-3 (i.e., January-September) only. The deadline for
  submitting 2022 quarter 4 data to AQS is March 31, 2023. Thus, at the time this proposal was being developed,
  the deadline for submitting quarter 4 (October-December) data had not yet passed and these data had not yet
  been submitted to AQS.

III. Consequences for a Serious PM10 Nonattainment Area Failing To
Attain the Standards by the Attainment Date

    The consequences for a Serious PM\10\ nonattainment area for
failing to attain the standards by the applicable attainment date are
set forth in CAA sections 179(d) and 189(d). Under section 179(d), a
state must submit a SIP revision for the area meeting the requirements
of CAA sections 110 and 172, the latter of which requires, among other
elements, a demonstration of attainment and reasonable further
progress, and contingency measures. CAA section 189(d) requires that
the SIP revision must provide for attainment of the standards and, from
the date of the SIP submittal until attainment, for an annual reduction
in the emissions of PM10 or a PM10 precursor
pollutant within the area of not less than five percent of the amount
of such emissions as reported in the most recent inventory prepared for
such area.
    The requirement for a new attainment demonstration under CAA
section 189(d) also triggers the requirement for the SIP revision for
quantitative milestones under section 189(c) that are to be achieved
every three years until redesignation to attainment.
    In addition, because the EPA has not yet approved a Moderate or
Serious area attainment plan for West Pinal County, the Moderate and
Serious area requirements also remain outstanding. The EPA anticipates
that Arizona's submission of an approvable Serious area and 189(d)
nonattainment plan would also satisfy the State's Moderate area
nonattainment plan obligations. For example, an approvable Serious area
nonattainment plan would satisfy the Act's requirements for imposing
best available control measures, including best available control
technology, which would presumably satisfy the less stringent Moderate
area requirements for reasonably available control measures, including
reasonably available control technology.
    The new attainment date is set by CAA section 179(d)(3), which
relies upon section 172(a)(2) to establish a new attainment date but
with a different starting point than provided in section 172(a)(2).
Under section 179(d)(3), the new attainment date is the date by which
attainment can be achieved as expeditiously as practicable, but no
later than five years from the date of the final determination of
failure to attain, except that the EPA may extend the attainment date
for a period no greater than 10 years from the final determination,
considering the severity of nonattainment and the availability and
feasibility of pollution control measures. Lastly, section 189(d)
requires that the state submit the required SIP revision within 12
months after the applicable attainment date. In this case, if the EPA
finalizes this proposed rule, then the State of Arizona will be
required to submit a SIP revision that complies with sections 179(d)
and 189(d) within 12 months of December 31, 2022, i.e., by December 31,
2023.

IV. Summary of Our Proposed Action

    In accordance with sections 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) of the CAA, the
EPA is proposing to determine that West Pinal County did not attain the
1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS by the applicable Serious area
attainment date of December 31, 2022. Our proposed determination that
West Pinal County failed to attain the PM10 NAAQS is based
on complete and quality-assured 2020 and 2021 data and preliminary 2022
data. We are soliciting comment on this proposed finding.
    If we finalize our action as proposed, Arizona will be required
under CAA sections 179(d) and 189(d) to submit a revision to the SIP
for West Pinal County that, among other elements,

demonstrates expeditious attainment of the standards within the time
period provided under CAA section 179(d), and that provides for an
annual reduction in the emissions of PM10 or a
PM10 precursor pollutant within the area of not less than
five percent until attainment. The SIP revision required under CAA
sections 179(d) and 189(d) would be due for submittal to the EPA no
later than December 31, 2023.
    The EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in
this document. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal
until March 17, 2023 and will consider comments before taking final
action.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

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

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and therefore
was not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the PRA because it does not contain any information
collection activities.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This
proposed action, if finalized, would require the State to adopt and
submit SIP revisions to satisfy CAA requirements and would not itself
directly regulate any small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million
or more, as described in UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action itself
imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments,
or the private sector. This action proposes to determine that West
Pinal County failed to attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date. If finalized, this determination would trigger existing statutory
timeframes for the State to submit a SIP revision. Such a determination
in and of itself does not impose any federal intergovernmental mandate.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. As there are no federally recognized tribes
within West Pinal County,\26\ the proposed finding of failure to attain
the PM10 NAAQS does not apply to tribal areas, and the
proposed rule would not impose a burden on Indian reservation lands or
other areas where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction within West Pinal County. Thus, this proposed
rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified
by Executive Order 13175.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Map of Federally-Recognized Tribes in EPA's Pacific
Southwest (Region IX) is available at https://www.epa.gov/tribal-pacific-sw/map-federally-recognized-tribes-epas-pacific-southwest-region-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This proposed action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because the effect of this proposed
action, if finalized, would be to trigger additional planning
requirements under the CAA. This proposed action does not establish an
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

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

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    Executive Order 12898 establishes federal executive policy on
environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal agencies, to
the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make
environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States. There is no information in the record indicating that
this action would be inconsistent with the stated goals of Executive
Order 12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color,
low-income populations, and indigenous peoples.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: February 9, 2023.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2023-03198 Filed 2-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on January 4, 2006

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 2003-16210

________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of UNITED AIR LINES, INC. (UNITED), filed 7/8/05 for:

XX  Renewal of exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. §40109 to
provide the following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between Washington, D.C., and Cancun, Mexico.

Applicant rep:   Jeffrey A. Manley<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT Analyst:  Thuy
H. Cooper<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken: January 4, 2006, through
January 4, 2008.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Mexico.

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

XX  Holder’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

	XX  Standard exemption conditions (attached)

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

Conditions:  The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted is subject to
the dormancy notice requirements set forth in condition 7 of Appendix A
of Order 88-10-2.

Responsive Pleadings:  On July 18, 2005, the Metropolitan Washington
Airports Authority filed an answer supporting United’s application.
On July 25, 2005, AirTran Airways, Inc. (AirTran) filed an answer
requesting that the Department defer action on United’s application
until the bilateral rights of U.S. air carriers to directly provide
scheduled combination services have been resolved in negotiations with
the Government of Mexico.  United filed a reply.  On September 21, 2005,
the United States and Mexico reached an agreement expanding U.S. carrier
rights to serve various Mexico points, including Cancun, and the United
States and Mexico signed the agreement in Mexico City on December 12,
2005.
________________________________________________________________________
__________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department's regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that

(1) our action was consistent with Department policy; (2) grant of the
exemption authority was consistent with the public interest; and (3)
grant of the authority would not constitute a major regulatory action
under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.  To the extent not
granted, we denied all requests in the referenced Docket.  We may amend,
modify, or revoke the authority granted in this Notice at any time
without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

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

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

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

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

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

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

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

05/2004

  On November 23, 2004, United filed an application, in Docket
OST-1999-5846, requesting renewal of its U.S.-Mexico certificate
authority and amendment of that authority to add, inter alia, its
exemption authority for the Washington, D.C.-Cancun market to its
certificate.  In the instant docket, United requests renewal of its
Washington, D.C.-Cancun exemption authority by substantially equivalent
certificate authority, or, in the alternative, renewal of its exemption
authority for a minimum of two years.  We will address the carrier’s
request to amend its certificate authority separately.

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40625-40627]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17566]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0389; FMCSA-2012-0294; FMCSA-2013-0109; FMCSA-
2013-0442; FMCSA-2014-0380; FMCSA 2015-0321]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

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 20
individuals from the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers have ``no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of
epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.'' The exemptions
enable these individuals who have had one or more seizures and are
taking anti-seizure medication to continue to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

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 September
14, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket Nos. FMCSA-2011-0389; FMCSA-2012-0294;
FMCSA-2013-0109; FMCSA-2013-0442; FMCSA-2014-0380; FMCSA 2015-0321
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number(s) for this notice. Note that all comments received will
be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day e.t.,
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 online.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these

comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for five years 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 five-year period. FMCSA
grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-year period to align with
the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria to assist Medical Examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce. [49 CFR part 391, APPENDIX A TO PART 391--MEDICAL
ADVISORY CRITERIA, section H. Epilepsy: Sec.  391.41(b)(8), paragraphs
3, 4, and 5.]
    The 20 individuals listed in this notice have requested renewal of
their exemptions from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in
49 CFR 391.41(b)(8), 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 two-year period.

II. 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, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

III. Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 20
applicants has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an
exemption from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition. The 20
drivers in this notice remain in good standing with the Agency, have
maintained their medical monitoring and have not exhibited any medical
issues that would compromise their ability to safely operate a CMV
during the previous two-year exemption period. In addition, for
Commercial Driver's License (CDL) holders, the Commercial Driver's
License Information System (CDLIS) and the Motor Carrier Management
Information System (MCMIS) are searched for crash and violation data.
For non-CDL holders, the Agency reviews the driving records from the
State Driver's Licensing Agency (SDLA). These factors provide an
adequate basis for predicting each driver's ability to continue to
safely operate a CMV 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.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following
groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of April and
are discussed below:
    As of April 8, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following four individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers:

Jeffrey F. Ballweg (WI)
Harold J. Durkee (WI)
Michael C. Ranalli (PA)
Lonnie M. Rieker (IL)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2011-0389; FMCSA-
2012-0294; FMCSA-2013-0109; FMCSA-2014-0380. Their exemptions are
applicable as of April 8, 2018, and will expire on April 8, 2020.
    As of April 11, 2018, 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 epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers:

Robert P. Brackett (ME)
Kelly L. Frederick (LA)
Scott W. Gessner (PA)
Jerry L. Henderson (IN)
Preston R. Kanagy (TN)
Scott A. Lowe (MA)
Steven D. Shirley (UT)
Matthew J. Staley (CO)
Mohammad S. Warrad (IA)
Richard J. Wenner (MN)
John C. Wolfe (PA)
Dennis R. Zayic (MN)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2015-0321. Their
exemptions are applicable as of April 11, 2018, and will expire on
April 11, 2020.
    As of April 23, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following four individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers:

Raymond Lobo (NJ)
Randy L. Pinto (PA)
James M. Spece (PA)
Joseph A. Thomas (MD)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0442. Their
exemptions are applicable as of April 23, 2018, and will expire on
April 23, 2020.

IV. Conditions and Requirements

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) Each driver must remain seizure-free and maintain a stable
treatment during the two-year exemption period; (2) each driver must
submit annual reports from their treating physicians attesting to the
stability of treatment and that the driver has remained seizure-free;
(3) each driver must undergo an annual medical examination by a
certified Medical Examiner, as defined by 49 CFR 390.5; and (4) each
driver must provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the
employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep a
copy of his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-employed.
The driver must also have a copy of the exemption when driving, for
presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement
official. 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.

V. 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 20 exemption applications, FMCSA
renews the exemptions of the aforementioned drivers from the epilepsy
and seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41 (b)(8). In
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption will be
valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.

    Issued on: August 9, 2018.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-17566 Filed 8-14-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 131 (Wednesday, July 9, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38775-38776]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16067]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0103]
RIN 1625-AA08

Regattas and Marine Parades; Great Lakes Annual Marine Events

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce various special local regulations
for annual regattas and marine parades in the Captain of the Port
Detroit zone from 9 a.m. on June 27, 2014 through 6 p.m. on August 10,
2014. Enforcement of these regulations is necessary and intended to
ensure safety of life on the navigable waters immediately prior to,
during, and immediately after these regattas or marine parades. During
the aforementioned period, the Coast Guard will enforce restrictions
upon, and control movement of vessels in a specified area immediately
prior to, during, and immediately after regattas or marine parades.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.914, 100.915, 100.918, 100.919,
and 100.920 will be enforced at dates and times specified in this
document from June 27, 2014, through August 10, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
document, call or email LT Adrian Palomeque, Prevention Department,
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Detroit, 110 Mount Elliot Ave., Detroit, MI
48207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the following
special local regulations listed in 33 CFR Part 100, Safety of Life on
Navigable Waters, on the following dates and times, which are listed in
chronological order:
    (1) Sec.  100.919 International Bay City River Roar, Bay City, MI.
    This special local regulation will be enforced from 9 a.m. to 6
p.m. on June 27, 28, and 29, 2014. A regulated area is established to
include all waters of the Saginaw River bounded on the north by the
Liberty Bridge, located at 43[deg]36.3' N, 083[deg]53.4' W, and bounded
on the south by the Veterans Memorial Bridge, located at 43[deg]35.8'
N, 083[deg]53.6' W.
    (2) Sec.  100.920 Tug Across the River, Detroit, MI.
    This special local regulation will be enforced from 6 p.m. to 6:45
p.m. on

July 11, 2014. A regulated area is established to include all waters of
the Detroit River, Detroit, Michigan, bounded on the south by the
International boundary, on the west by 083[deg]03' W, on the east by
083[deg]02' W, and on the north by the U.S. shoreline (DATUM: NAD 83).
This position is located on the Detroit River in front of Hart Plaza,
Detroit, MI.
    (3) Sec.  100.918 Detroit APBA Gold Cup, Detroit MI.
    This special local regulation will be enforced from 7 a.m. to 7
p.m. on July 11, 12, and 13, 2014. A regulated area is established to
include all waters of the Detroit River, Belle Isle, Michigan, bound on
the west by the Belle Isle Bridge (position 42[deg]20'20'' N,
083[deg]00'00'' W to 42[deg]20'24'' N, 083[deg]59'45'' W), and on the
east by a north-south line drawn through Waterworks Intake Crib Light
(Light List Number 8350; position 42[deg]21'06'' N, 082[deg]58'00'' W).
    (4) Sec.  100.914 Trenton Rotary Roar on the River, Trenton, MI.
    This special local regulation will be enforced from 8 a.m. to 8
p.m. on July 18, 19, and 20, 2014. The regulated area is established to
include all waters of the Detroit River, Trenton, Michigan, bounded by
an east/west line beginning at a point of land at the northern end of
Elizabeth Park in Trenton, MI, located at position 42[deg]8.2' N;
083[deg]10.6' W, extending east to a point near the center of the
Trenton Channel located at position 42[deg]8.2' N; 083[deg]10.4' W,
extending south along a north/south line to a point at the Grosse Ile
Parkway Bridge located at position 42[deg]7.7' N; 083[deg]10.5' W,
extending west along a line bordering the Grosse Ile Parkway Bridge to
a point on land located at position 42[deg]7.7' N; 083[deg]10.7' W, and
along the shoreline to the point of origin. This area is in the Trenton
Channel between Trenton and Grosse Isle, MI.
    (5) Sec.  100.915 St. Clair River Classic Offshore Race, St. Clair,
MI.
    This special local regulation will be enforced from 10 a.m. to 6
p.m. on August 8, 9, and 10, 2014. A regulated area is established to
include all waters of the St. Clair River, St. Clair, Michigan, bounded
by latitude 42[deg]52'00'' N to the north; latitude 42[deg]49'00'' N to
the south; the shoreline of the St. Clair River on the west; and the
international boundary line on the east.
    These five special local regulation sections apply regulations in
Sec.  100.901. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within these
regulated areas is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard
patrol commander (PATCOM). The PATCOM may restrict vessel operation
within the regulated area to vessels having particular operating
characteristics.
    Vessels permitted to enter this regulated area must operate at a no
wake speed and in a manner that will not endanger race participants or
any other craft.
    The PATCOM may direct the anchoring, mooring, or movement of any
vessel within this regulated area. A succession of sharp, short signals
by whistle or horn from vessels patrolling the area under the direction
of the PATCOM shall serve as a signal to stop. Vessels so signaled
shall stop and shall comply with the orders of the PATCOM. Failure to
do so may result in expulsion from the area, a Notice of Violation for
failure to comply, or both.
    If it is deemed necessary for the protection of life and property,
the PATCOM may terminate at any time the marine event or the operation
of any vessel within the regulated area.
    In accordance with the general regulations in Sec.  100.35, the
Coast Guard will patrol the regatta area under the direction of a
designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The PATCOM may be
contacted on Channel 16 (156.8 MHz) by the call sign ``Coast Guard
Patrol Commander.''
    The rules in Sec.  100.901 do not apply to vessels participating in
the event or to government vessels patrolling the regulated area in the
performance of their assigned duties.
    This document is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.35 and 5
U.S.C. 552 (a). If the Captain of the Port determines that any of these
special local regulations need not be enforced for the full duration
stated in this document, he or she may suspend such enforcement and
notify the public of the suspension via a Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: June 24, 2014.
S.B. Lemasters,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. 2014-16067 Filed 7-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 28 (Monday, February 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9685-9686]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03016]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4501-005; ER12-2448-003; ER12-979-003; ER11-
4498-004; ER11-4499-004.
    Applicants: Caney River Wind Project, LLC, Chisholm View Wind
Project, LLC, Rocky Ridge Wind Project, LLC, Smoky Hills Wind Farm,
LLC, Smoky Hills Wind Project II, LLC.
    Description: Updated Market Power Analysis for the Southwest Power
Pool, Inc. Region of Caney River Wind Project, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 02/01/2013.
    Accession Number: 20130201-5236.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/2/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-868-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: 2-1-2013 Module E-2 Filing to be effective 4/2/2013.
    Filed Date: 2/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20130201-5157.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/22/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-869-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing re: inclusion of TB 217 within the
tariffs to be effective 4/2/2013.
    Filed Date: 2/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20130201-5181.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/22/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-870-000.
    Applicants: Kansas City Power & Light Company.
    Description: Rate Schedule 54 Kansas BPU Filing to be effective 3/
15/2013.
    Filed Date: 2/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20130201-5182.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/22/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-871-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: 2013-02-01 SA 2506 ITC-Pheasant Run E&P to be
effective 1/3/2013.
    Filed Date: 2/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20130201-5201.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/22/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-872-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: 2013-02-01 Market-Based Rate Authority Suspension to
be effective 4/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 2/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20130201-5207.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/22/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-873-000.
    Applicants: New England Power Pool Participants Committee.
    Description: Feb 2013 Membership Filing to be effective 1/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 2/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20130201-5209.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/22/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-874-000.
    Applicants: Rocky Mountain Reserve Group.
    Description: 20130201--RMRG Agreement to be effective 4/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 2/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20130201-5215.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/22/13.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:

    Docket Numbers: OA07-35-007.
    Applicants: Cleco Power LLC.
    Description: Cleco Power LLC's 2012 Informational Filing of
Operational Penalty Assessments and Distributions as Required by Order
Nos. 890 and 890-A.
    Filed Date: 2/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20130201-5239.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/22/13.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: February 4, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-03016 Filed 2-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

Regarding:  FDA Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491 Please extend the comment period for the Proposed Rule for an additional 180 days.  So that individuals such as myself and the groups that we belong to can effectively respond to this major proposal.

I do not believe that I ever would have been able to stop smoking without the aid of e-cigarettes, and I suspect that the current backlash against this technology has more to do with entrenched powers losing money than the health of myself or other Americans.

“Our Side” does not have the money or the influence that the big boys do, but I ask that you at least give us time to try and respond.

Thank you Shawn Regan


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 89 (Monday, May 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28130-28131]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10796]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0119]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt nine individuals from
the regulatory requirement that interstate commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers have ``no established medical history or clinical
diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause
loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.'' The
exemptions enable these individuals to operate CMVs in interstate
commerce.

DATES: The exemptions were effective on December 16, 2015. The
exemptions expire on December 16, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-113,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Electronic Access

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

II. Background

    On November 12, 2015, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt
of applications from 13 individuals requesting an exemption from the
prohibition against persons with a clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or
any other condition that is likely to cause a loss of consciousness or
any loss of ability to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and
requested comments from the public (80 FR 70065). The public comment
period closed on December 14, 2015, and seven comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that granting the exemptions to nine individuals would
achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that
would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(8).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person

    Has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of
epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause the loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.

    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce. The advisory criteria found in Appendix A to 49
CFR 391.41, states that:

    If an individual has had a sudden episode of a non-epileptic
seizure or loss of consciousness of unknown cause that did not
require anti-seizure medication, the decision whether that person's
condition is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or loss of
ability to control a CMV should be made on an individual basis by
the medical examiner in consultation with the treating physician.
Before certification is considered, it is suggested that a 6-month
waiting period elapse from the time of the episode. Following the
waiting period, it is suggested that the individual have a complete
neurological examination. If the results of the examination are
negative and anti-seizure medication is not required, then the
driver may be qualified.
    In those individual cases where a driver had a seizure or an
episode of loss of

consciousness that resulted from a known medical condition (e.g.,
drug reaction, high temperature, acute infectious disease,
dehydration, or acute metabolic disturbance), certification should
be deferred until the driver has recovered fully from that
condition, has no existing residual complications, and is not taking
anti-seizure medication.
    Drivers who have a history of epilepsy/seizures, off anti-
seizure medication and seizure-free for 10 years, may be qualified
to operate a CMV in interstate commerce. Interstate drivers with a
history of a single unprovoked seizure may be qualified to drive a
CMV in interstate commerce if seizure-free and off anti-seizure
medication for a 5-year period or more.

    As a result of medical examiners misinterpreting advisory criteria
as regulation, numerous drivers have been prohibited from operating a
CMV in interstate commerce based on the fact that they have had one or
more seizures and are taking anti-seizure medication, rather than an
individual analysis of their circumstances by a qualified medical
examiner based on the physical qualification standards and medical best
practices.
    In reaching the decision to grant these exemption requests, the
Agency considered the 2007 recommendations of the Agency's Medical
Expert Panel (MEP). The January 15, 2013 (78 FR 3069) Federal Register
notice provides the current MEP recommendations which is the criteria
the Agency uses to grant seizure exemptions.
    These nine applicants have been seizure-free over a range of 5 to
44 years while taking anti-seizure medication and maintained a stable
medication treatment regimen for the last two years. In each case, the
applicant's treating physician verified his or her seizure history and
supports the ability to drive commercially. A summary of each
applicant's seizure history was discussed in the November 12, 2015
Federal Register notice and will not be repeated in this notice.

III. Discussion of Comments

    Seven commenters responded to this notice, six of whom specifically
expressed support for applicant Thomas Vivirito and one in support of
her husband receiving an exemption. The Agency has determined that nine
applicants should be granted an exemption.

IV. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the epilepsy/seizure standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) if the
exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety
than would be achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows the
applicants to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on an individualized assessment of each applicant's medical
information, including the root cause of the respective seizure(s) and
medical information about the applicant's seizure history, the length
of time that has elapsed since the individual's last seizure, the
stability of each individual's treatment regimen and the duration of
time on or off of anti-seizure medication. In addition, the Agency
reviewed the treating clinician's medical opinion related to the
ability of the driver to safely operate a CMV with a history of seizure
and each applicant's driving record found in the Commercial Driver's
License Information System (CDLIS) for commercial driver's license
(CDL) holders, and interstate and intrastate inspections recorded in
the Motor Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS). For non-CDL
holders, the Agency reviewed the driving records from the State
Driver's Licensing Agency (SDLA). The Agency acknowledges the potential
consequences of a driver experiencing a seizure while operating a CMV.
However, the Agency believes the drivers granted this exemption have
demonstrated that they are unlikely to have a seizure and their medical
condition does not pose a risk to public safety.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these
applicants from the epilepsy/seizure standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) is
likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

V. Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption will be provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1)
Each individual must remain seizure-free and maintain a stable
treatment during the 2-year exemption period; (2) each individual must
submit annual reports from their treating physicians attesting to the
stability of treatment and that the driver has remained seizure-free;
(3) each individual must undergo an annual medical examination by a
certified Medical Examiner, as defined by 49 CFR 390.5; and (4) each
individual 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 file if he/she is self-
employed. The driver must also have a copy of the exemption when
driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local
enforcement official.

VI. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the nine exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the epilepsy/seizure standard in 49
CFR 391.41(b)(8), subject to the requirements cited above: Kenneth Lee
Brown (WY), Douglas Ray Burkhardt (SD); Curtis Alan Hartman (MD);
Wendell Frank Headley, Jr. (MO); Gregory L. Hrutkay (PA); Michael
William Ketchum, Sr. (MI); Marion Franklin Legg, Jr. (MD); Alvin
Clarence Strite (PA); and Thomas B. Vivirito (PA).
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), each exemption is valid
for 2 years, unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
revoked if the following occurs: (1) The individual fails to comply
with the terms and conditions of the exemption;
    (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was
maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136 and 31315. If the exemption is still effective at the end of the
2-year period, the individual may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under
procedures in effect at that time.

    Issued on: April 29, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-10796 Filed 5-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 220 (Thursday, November 14, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68497-68499]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27207]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-70834; File No. SR-ISE-2013-55]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change Relating to Exchange Trading Days and Hours of Business and
Trading Halts

November 7, 2013.
    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 October 31, 2013, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(the ``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I, II, and III 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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its rules to clarify Rule 700,
``Days and Hours of Business,'' and Rule 702, ``Trading Halts.''
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Internet Web site at 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 Exchange 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 is proposing to amend its rules to clarify when it
will be open for trading along with when trading halts on underlying
securities will inhibit trading on the Exchange. The Exchange is
submitting this proposed rule change as a competitive response to a
recently approved rule filing submitted by the Chicago Board Options
Exchange (``CBOE'').\3\ Specifically, the Exchange is proposing to
amend its rules to clarify that it will not be solely dependent upon
the ``primary market'' when determining when to open and/or halt
securities. Instead, the Exchange is proposing to clarify in its rules
that it will be open if there is ample liquidity in the underlying
market for the security. Generally, the national equity exchanges have
similar core business hours.\4\ With this proposal, the Exchange is
attempting to clarify in its rules that it can remain open to trade
options during such business hours even if the ``primary market'' of
the underlying securities is not open for business. The Exchange
believes that the proposed changes will allow the markets to continue
to function in an instance where all exchanges may not be halted. In
addition, the Exchange believes the proposed changes will bring greater
clarity to its Members regarding when the Exchange will be open for
trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69558 (May 10,
2013), 78 FR 28911 (May 16, 2013) (SR-CBOE-2013-035).
    \4\ See, e.g., New York Stock Exchange Rule 51(a) and BATS
Exchange Rule 1.5(w) which describes regular trading hours as 9:30
a.m. through 4:00 p.m. Eastern.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Exchange Rule 700 provides that no Member shall make any
bid, offer, or transaction on the Exchange before or after business
hours.\5\ As an administrative cleanup change, the Exchange is
proposing to eliminate this language as it is no longer relevant.
Executions may only happen during business hours, however, Members have
the ability to submit information in the Exchange's electronic trading
system outside of business hours. The Exchange believes deleting this
language would bring greater clarity to Exchange rules while updating
the rule text to the current trading environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Exchange Rule 700.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the Exchange is proposing to add language to Rule 700(a) to
specify that the Exchange will not solely rely on the ``primary
market'' of an underlying security to determine whether the Exchange
may trade the option for such security. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change will specify that if there is an ample market in
the underlying security, the Exchange has the authority to trade the
option even if the primary market is not open. The Exchange believes
that allowing such discretion will create a lesser market disruption if
the primary exchange is unable to open for trading.
    Further, Rule 702 specifies when the Exchange will halt trading.\6\
Specifically, Rule 702(a)(1) lists factors that may be considered in
making that determination. Currently, Rule 702(a)(1)(i) lists, as a
factor in the decision with respect to options, ``trading in the
underlying security has been halted or suspended in the primary
market.'' The Exchange is proposing to add language to state, instead
of the ``primary market,'' that the Exchange may factor in if ``trading
in the underlying security has been halted or suspended in one or more
of the markets trading the underlying security.'' The Exchange is
proposing to make similar changes in Rule 702(a)(2)(iv) which lists
factors in making the determination in an Equity Security (as defined
in ISE Rule 2100). The Exchange believes the proposed changes will
grant discretion for the Exchange to be open for trading when there is
a robust market in the underlying security rather than limit it to only
when the ``primary market'' is open.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Exchange Rule 702. The Exchange is not proposing any
change to Rule 702(c), Trading Pauses, because a trading halt with
respect to options is mandatory and not subject to discretion
whenever trading in the security underlying the option contract has
been paused by the primary listing market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 702(a)(3) so that a
designated Exchange official may halt trading in an option not only if
the ``primary market'' of the security has halted trading but if the
security has been halted in ``one or more of the markets trading the
underlying security.'' Under the current rule, the designated Exchange
official almost certainly must halt trading whenever there is a halt of
trading in the underlying security. The Exchange believes this proposed
change will provide the designated Exchange official the discretion and
the authority to halt trading in an option if the primary market for an
underlying security is not open for business however that security is
being traded elsewhere. For example, if the primary market is unable to
open due to a natural disaster, or other circumstance, but other stock
exchanges are trading the underlying security, the proposed change will
allow the Exchange to continue trading the overlaying options.
    The Exchange believes the proposed changes will allow the Exchange
to trade options for underlying stocks even if that underlying listing
market shall be unable to trade due to an emergency or other
circumstance unique to that stock exchange. Making these proposed
changes will allow the Exchange to trade options when an underlying
security is trading on any national securities exchange regardless of
where that security is formally listed. The proposed discretion
attempts to create a lessor [sic] market disruption if a listing or
primary market is unable to trade due to some circumstance. Because of
the connectivity of the national securities exchanges today, the
Exchange believes limiting its ability to trade options to when the
primary market of the underlying security is open might hurt investors
if some circumstance should render the primary exchange inoperable. In
addition, the Exchange believes that the reference to ``primary
market'' is ambiguous and has the potential to cause confusion. Thus,
the Exchange believes by further clarifying the language, it is clearer
when the Exchange will be open for trading.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder, including the requirements of Section 6(b) of
the Act.\7\ In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \8\ requirements that the
rules of an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
to perfect the mechanism for a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change protects investors
by allowing trading in options as long as

the underlying security is trading on another exchange. Instead of only
relying on the ``primary market,'' the proposed rule change attempts to
clarify when options will trade on the Exchange to allow greater
continuity in the marketplace. By allowing the Exchange to trade
options whenever the underlying securities are trading, the proposed
rule change seeks to create less of a disconnect if the ``primary''
market should be experiencing technical difficulties, an emergency, or
other situation that may inhibit it to be connected to the marketplace.

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

    This proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act. The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change imposes
any burden on intramarket competition because it will apply to all
Members [sic]. In addition, the Exchange does not believe the proposed
rule change will impose any burden on intermarket competition as it
will merely give the Exchange discretion to trade options when there is
an ample market for the underlying security of those options. Thus, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change will promote competition by
giving the Exchange the ability to trade options when the underlying
security is trading anywhere, and, thus, helping the Exchange to better
participate in the marketplace. Additionally, as noted above, the
proposed rule change is a competitive response to a recently approved
rule filing submitted by the CBOE.\9\ ISE believes this proposed rule
change is necessary to permit fair competition among the options
exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Exchange believes that the foregoing proposed rule change may
take effect upon filing with the Commission pursuant to
Section19(b)(3)(A) \10\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder \11\
because the foregoing proposed rule change does not (i) significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest, (ii) impose
any significant burden on competition, and (iii) become operative for
30 days after its filing date, or such shorter time as the Commission
may designate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) 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-2013-55 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2013-55. 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
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; 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-2013-55 and should be
submitted on or before December 5, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-27207 Filed 11-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P