[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 122 (Wednesday, June 24, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37970-37974]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13539]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89091; File No. SR-FINRA-2020-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting
Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, to FINRA's Suitability, Non-Cash Compensation and
Capital Acquisition Broker (CAB) Rules in Response to Regulation Best
Interest

June 18, 2020.

I. Introduction

    On March 12, 2020, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'' or ``SEC''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend FINRA Rules 2111
(Suitability), 2310 (Direct Participation Programs), 2320 (Variable
Contracts of an Insurance Company), 2341 (Investment Company
Securities), and 5110 (Corporate Financing Rule--Underwriting Terms and
Arrangements) and Capital Acquisition Broker (CAB) Rule 211
(Suitability). The proposed rule change would: (1) Amend the FINRA and
CAB suitability rules to state that the rules do not apply to
recommendations subject to Regulation Best Interest (``Reg BI''),\3\
and to remove the element of control from the quantitative suitability
obligation; and (2) conform the rules governing non-cash compensation
to Reg BI's limitations on sales contests, sales quotas, bonuses and
non-cash compensation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.15l-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on March 25, 2020.\4\ The public comment period closed on
April 15, 2020.\5\ On April 28, 2020, FINRA consented to an extension
of the time period in which the Commission must approve the proposed
rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed
rule change to June 23, 2020.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Exchange Act Release No. 88422 (Mar. 19, 2020), 85 FR
16974 (Mar. 25, 2020) (File No. SR-FINRA-2020-007 (``Notice'')).
    \5\ All comment letters received on the proposed rule change are
available on the Commission's website at https://www.sec.gov.
    \6\ See Letter from Joseph Savage, Vice President and Counsel,
Office of General Counsel, FINRA, to Daniel Fisher, Branch Chief,
Division of Trading and Markets, U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, dated April 28, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 14, 2020, FINRA responded to the comment letters received in
response to the Notice and filed an amendment to the proposed rule
change (``Amendment No. 1'').\7\ The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on Amendment No. 1 from interested persons,
and is approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No.
1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Letter from Joseph Savage, Vice President and Counsel,
Office of General Counsel, FINRA, to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary,
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, dated May 13, 2020 (``FINRA
Letter''). The FINRA Letter and the text of Amendment No. 1 are
available at the Commission's website at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2020-007/srfinra2020007.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

Background

    On June 5, 2019, the Commission adopted Reg BI, a new rule under
the Exchange Act, which establishes a standard of conduct for broker-
dealers and natural persons who are associated persons of a broker-
dealer (unless otherwise indicated, together referred to as ``broker-
dealer'') when they make a recommendation of any securities transaction
or investment strategy involving securities to a retail customer.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86031 (Jun. 5,
2019), 84 FR 33318 (Jul. 12, 2019) (``Reg BI Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in the Reg BI Release, Reg BI enhances the broker-dealer
standard of conduct beyond existing suitability obligations, and aligns
the standard of conduct with retail customers' reasonable expectations
by requiring broker-dealers, among other things, to: Act in the best
interest of the retail customer at the time the recommendation is made,
without placing the financial or other interest of the broker-dealer
ahead of the interests of the retail customer; and address conflicts of
interest by establishing, maintaining, and enforcing policies and
procedures reasonably designed to identify and fully and fairly
disclose material facts about conflicts of interest, and in instances
where we have determined that disclosure is insufficient to reasonably
address the conflict, to mitigate or, in certain instances, eliminate
the conflict.\9\ The date by which broker-dealers must comply with Reg
BI is June 30, 2020.\10\ FINRA proposed to amend its suitability and
non-cash compensation rules to address inconsistencies between the
FINRA rules and Reg BI, and to make clear how these rules will
intersect. The effective date of FINRA's proposed rule change will be
the compliance date of Reg BI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Reg BI Release at 33318.
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Original Proposal

Suitability
    As FINRA stated in its Notice, FINRA Rule 2111 requires that a
broker-dealer ``have a reasonable basis to believe that a recommended
transaction or investment strategy involving a security or securities
is suitable for the customer, based on the information obtained through
the reasonable diligence of the member or associated person to
ascertain the customer's investment profile.'' \11\ Rule 2111 further
explains that a ``customer's investment profile includes, but is not
limited to, the customer's age, other investments, financial situation
and needs, tax status, investment objectives, investment experience,
investment time horizon, liquidity needs, risk tolerance, and any other
information the customer may disclose to the member or associated
person in connection with such recommendation.'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Notice at 16975.
    \12\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 2111 imposes three main suitability obligations: Reasonable
basis suitability, customer-specific suitability and quantitative
suitability.\13\ Reasonable basis suitability requires a member or
associated person to have a reasonable basis to believe, based on
reasonable diligence, that the recommendation is suitable for at least
some investors.\14\ Customer-specific suitability requires that a
member or associated person have a reasonable basis to believe that the
recommendation is suitable for a particular customer based on that
customer's investment profile.\15\ Quantitative suitability requires a
member or associated person who has actual or de facto control over a
customer account to have a reasonable basis for believing that a series
of recommended transactions, even if suitable when viewed in isolation,
are not excessive and unsuitable for the customer when taken together
in light of the customer's investment profile.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See id.
    \14\ See id.
    \15\ See id.
    \16\ Id.

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

    Rule 2111(b) provides an exemption to customer-specific suitability
for recommendations to institutional customers under specified
circumstances. FINRA rule 2111 sets forth three criteria that must be
satisfied in order for this exemption to apply. First, the account must
meet the definition of institutional account as defined in FINRA Rule
4512(c).\17\ Second, the broker-dealer must have a reasonable basis to
believe that the institutional customer is capable of evaluating
investment risks independently, both in general and with regard to
particular transactions and investment strategies involving a security
or securities.\18\ Third, the institutional customer must affirmatively
indicate that it is exercising independent judgment in evaluating the
member's or associated person's recommendations. Where an institutional
customer has delegated decision making authority to an agent, such as
an investment adviser or a bank trust department, these factors are
applied to the agent.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Id.
    \18\ Id.
    \19\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reg BI requires firms to satisfy four component obligations:
Disclosure, Care, Conflict of Interest, and Compliance.\20\ Consistent
with the Commission's statements, FINRA stated that Reg BI's Care
Obligation incorporates and enhances principles that are also found in
Rule 2111.\21\ FINRA stated that two key enhancements are that Reg BI
explicitly imposes a best interest standard and requires a
consideration of costs. In addition, FINRA stated in its Notice that as
compared to suitability, Reg BI: (i) Places greater emphasis than the
suitability rule on consideration of reasonably available alternatives;
\22\ (ii) explicitly applies to recommendations of types of accounts
(e.g., broker-dealer or investment adviser, or among broker-dealer
accounts, including recommendations of IRA rollovers); and (iii)
eliminates the ``control'' element of the quantitative suitability
obligation.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See id. See also Reg BI Release.
    \21\ See Notice at 16975.
    \22\ See id. See also Reg BI Release at 33381.
    \23\ See Notice at 16975.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA stated that in light of these enhancements included in Reg BI
and to provide clarity on the intersection between Reg BI and the FINRA
rules, it proposed to amend its suitability rule to provide that it
will not apply to recommendations subject to Reg BI.\24\ FINRA stated
that it did not propose to eliminate the suitability rule because it
applies broadly to all recommendations to customers whereas Reg BI
applies only to recommendations to ``retail customers,'' which Reg BI
defines as a natural person, or the legal representative of such
natural person, who receives a recommendation of any securities
transaction or investment strategy involving securities from a broker-
dealer and uses the recommendation primarily for personal, family, or
household purposes.\25\ Thus, FINRA believed its suitability rule is
still needed for entities and institutions (e.g., pension funds), and
natural persons who will not use recommendations primarily for
personal, family, or household purposes (e.g., small business owners
and charitable trusts).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See proposed FINRA Rule 2111.08.
    \25\ See 17 CFR 240.15l-1(b)(1).
    \26\ See Notice at 16975.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the proposed rule change modified the quantitative
suitability obligation under FINRA Rule 2111.05(c) to remove the
element of control that currently must be proved to demonstrate a
violation of that rule.\27\ FINRA stated that this change is consistent
with Reg BI, which eliminates the control element from the third
component of its Care Obligation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See proposed FINRA Rule 2111.05(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the proposed rule change amended CAB Rule 211 to state
that it will not apply to recommendations subject to Reg BI.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See proposed CAB Rule 211.03.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Non-Cash Compensation
    FINRA Rules 2310 (Direct Participation Programs), 2320 (Variable
Contracts of an Insurance Company), 2341 (Investment Company
Securities), and 5110 (Corporate Financing Rule--Underwriting Terms and
Arrangements) each include provisions restricting the payment and
receipt of non-cash compensation in connection with the sale and
distribution of securities governed by those rules.\29\ FINRA stated
that, as a general matter, these rules limit non-cash compensation
arrangements to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Notice at 16975.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Gifts that do not exceed $100 in value and that are not
preconditioned on the achievement of a sales target;
     An occasional meal, a ticket to a sporting event or the
theater, or other comparable entertainment that does not raise any
question of propriety and is not preconditioned on the achievement of a
sales target;
     Payment or receipt by ``offerors'' (generally product
sponsors and their affiliates) in connection with training or education
meetings, subject to specified conditions, including that the payment
of such compensation is not conditioned on achieving a sales target;
and
     Internal non-cash compensation arrangements between a
member and its associated persons, subject to specified conditions. If
the internal non-cash compensation arrangement is in the form of a
sales contest, the contest must be based on the total production of
associated persons with respect to all securities within the rule's
product category, and credit for those sales must be equally
weighted.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See FINRA Rules 2310(c), 2320(g), 2341(l)(5), and 5110(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reg BI's Conflict of Interest Obligation requires, among other
things, that broker-dealers establish, maintain, and enforce written
policies and procedures reasonably designed to identify and eliminate
any sales contests, sales quotas, bonuses, and non-cash compensation
that are based on the sales of specific securities or specific types of
securities within a limited time period.\31\ FINRA stated that its
current non-cash compensation rules permit internal firm sales contests
that may not meet this standard, since they permit contests based on
sales of specific types of securities (such as mutual funds or variable
annuities).\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See 17 CFR 240.15l-1(a)(2)(iii)(D).
    \32\ See Notice at 16976.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA proposed to modify its rules governing non-cash compensation
arrangements to specify that any non-cash compensation arrangement
permitted by those rules must be consistent with the requirements of
Reg BI. FINRA also proposed to eliminate provisions in Rules 2320,
2341, and 5110 that require internal non-cash compensation arrangements
to be based on total production and equal weighting of securities
sales.\33\ FINRA stated that firms generally would no longer have been
permitted to sponsor or maintain internal sales contests based on sales
of securities within a product category within a limited time, even if
they were based on total production and equal weighting and that this
requirement also would have applied to the non-cash compensation
provisions governing gifts, business entertainment and training or
education meetings.\34\ Further, FINRA stated that these forms of non-
cash compensation may not be preconditioned on achievement of a sales
target.\35\ Nevertheless, FINRA

believed that it must make clear that these provisions do not permit
arrangements that conflict with Reg BI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See proposed amendments to FINRA Rules 2310(c), 2320(g),
2341(l)(5), and 5110(h).
    \34\ See Notice at 16976.
    \35\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Change as Modified by Amendment No. 1

    In response to comments \36\ (discussed below), FINRA is modifying
its proposed rule change by not deleting rule text in FINRA Rules
2320(g)(4)(D) and 2341(l)(5)(D) that require non-cash compensation
arrangements between a member and its associated persons, or between a
non-member company and its sales personnel who are associated persons
of an affiliated member, for the sale of variable insurance products
(under Rule 2320) or investment company securities (under Rule 2341) to
be based on the total production and equal weighting of sales of those
products.\37\ FINRA also is not deleting rule text in FINRA Rules
2310(c)(2)(C), 2320(g)(4)(C), 2341(l)(5)(C) and 5110(h)(2)(C) that
reference Rules 2310(c)(2)(D), 2320(g)(4)(D), 2341(l)(5)(D), and
5110(h)(2)(D), respectively.\38\ In its Amendment No. 1, FINRA also
cautions members not to conclude that any sales contest that awards
non-cash compensation for sales of securities within particular product
categories is per se permissible under Reg BI.\39\ FINRA's Proposed
Amendment No. 1 does not alter the proposed suitability changes to
FINRA Rule 2111 and CAB Rule 211.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See letter from Clifford Kirsch and Eric Arnolds, Eversheds
Sutherland (US) LLP, for the Committee of Annuity Insurers, dated
April 15, 2020 (``CAI Letter'') and letter from Robin M. Traxler,
Financial Services Institute, April 15, 2020 (``FSI Letter'').
    \37\ See FINRA Letter.
    \38\ Id.
    \39\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review of the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, the comment letters, and FINRA's response to the
comments, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the requirements of the
Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that are
applicable to a national securities association.\40\ Specifically, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 15A(b)(6) of the Exchange Act,\41\ which requires, among other
things, that FINRA rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \41\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Suitability Rule Changes

    Most commenters supported the changes to FINRA Rule 2111
(Suitability) and CAB Rule 211 (Suitability),\42\ and none
objected.\43\ For example, one commenter commended FINRA for the
proposed changes and encouraged the SEC to approve the proposed rule
change because ``it brings important clarity and consistency to the
standards governing broker-dealers' relationships with retail
customers.'' \44\ However, one commenter that supported the proposed
rule change stated that ``Reg BI should have gone further.'' \45\ No
commenters suggested amendments to the proposed rule text amending Rule
2111 and CAB Rule 211.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See letter from Christopher A. Iacovella, American
Securities Association, dated April 20, 2020 (``ASA Letter'');
letter from Kristen Malinconico, Center for Capital Markets
Competitiveness, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, dated April 15, 2020
(``CCMC Letter''); letter from Emily Micale, Insured Retirement
Institute, dated April 15, 2020 (``IRI Letter''); letter from Samuel
B. Edwards, Public Investors Advocate Bar Association, dated April
15, 2020 (``PIABA Letter''); and FSI Letter.
    \43\ One commenter did not address the proposed changes to the
Suitability Rules. See CAI Letter.
    \44\ See CCMC Letter.
    \45\ See PIABA Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Taking into consideration the comments, the Commission believes
that the proposed suitability rule changes are consistent with the
Exchange Act. As the Commission stated in the Reg BI Release, the Care
Obligation of Reg BI incorporates and enhances existing suitability
requirements.\46\ In light of the overlap, the Commission believes that
it would be redundant and unnecessary for FINRA's suitability rule to
apply to recommendations that are subject to Reg BI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Reg BI Release at 33327.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated by FINRA, without these changes, a broker-dealer would be
required to comply with both Reg BI and FINRA's suitability rules when
making recommendations to retail customers, and in such circumstances,
compliance with Reg BI would result in compliance with FINRA's
suitability rules.\47\ The Commission agrees with FINRA and believes
that the proposed rule change will help protect investors and the
public interest by avoiding potential confusion surrounding whether Reg
BI or FINRA's suitability obligations apply, which in turn will
facilitate compliance with applicable regulations. In addition, the
changes will provide continued protections of FINRA's suitability rules
for customers that are not retail customers for purposes of Reg BI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See Notice at 16974.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission further believes that the removal of the element of
control from the quantitative suitability obligation will align FINRA's
suitability rule with the Care Obligation of Reg BI, which the
Commission believes will enhance investor protection for customers that
are not retail customers for purposes of Reg BI by requiring a broker-
dealer to always form a reasonable basis as to the recommended
frequency of trading in a retail customer's account--irrespective of
whether the broker-dealer ``controls'' or exercises ``de facto
control'' over the retail customer's account.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See Reg BI Release at 33374.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For these reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change to the suitability rules is appropriate and designed to protect
investors and the public interest, consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of
the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder.

Proposed Changes to Non-Cash Compensation Rules

    Most commenters supported the changes to the non-cash compensation
provisions in FINRA Rules 2310, 2320, 2341, and 5110.\49\ These
commenters generally supported FINRA's goal of aligning its non-cash
compensation rules consistent with Reg BI.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See PIABA Letter, CCMC Letter, ASA Letter, and IRI Letter.
    \50\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, a few commenters expressed concerns with FINRA's
statements suggesting that contests based on sales of securities within
particular product categories, such as mutual funds or variable
annuities, would no longer be permitted under Reg BI.\51\ One commenter
stated ``what seems more consistent with what the SEC had in mind with
respect to variable contracts and mutual funds would be to apply the
limited period sales contest prohibition to specific types of variable
annuities or funds within those general product categories.'' \52\ The
commenter also said that ``FINRA has effectively converted the language
restricting limited period sales contests for `specific types of
securities' under Reg BI to a restriction on limited period sales
contests that are for a `product category''' and that FINRA's
conclusion that variable contracts be viewed as constituting a specific
type of security under Reg BI is

``fundamentally inconsistent with how the SEC describes and interprets
that phrase under the Reg BI Adopting Release.'' \53\ The other
commenter expressed similar concerns and suggested that FINRA clarify
that its non-cash compensation rules are meant to align with Reg BI in
all respects, including what constitutes sales of specific types of
securities.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See FSI Letter and CAI Letter.
    \52\ See CAI Letter.
    \53\ See id.
    \54\ See FSI Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response, FINRA stated it was not its intent to propose changes
to its non-cash compensation rules that would prohibit sales contests,
sales quotas, bonuses or non-cash compensation that are permissible
under Reg BI.\55\ Accordingly, as noted above, FINRA modified its
proposed rule change by not deleting rule text in FINRA Rules 2320 and
2341 that require non-cash compensation arrangements between a member
and its associated persons, or between a non-member company and its
sales personnel who are associated persons of an affiliated member, for
the sale of variable insurance products or investment company
securities to be based on the total production and equal weighting of
sales of those products.\56\ FINRA also modified its proposed rule
change by not deleting rule text in FINRA Rules 2310, 2320, 2341, and
5110.\57\ Finally, FINRA cautioned members not to conclude that any
sales contest that awards non-cash compensation for sales of securities
within particular product categories is per se permissible under Reg
BI.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ See FINRA Letter.
    \56\ See id.
    \57\ See id.
    \58\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Taking into consideration the comments, the FINRA Letter, and
Amendment No. 1, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change
to FINRA's non-cash compensation rules, as amended, is consistent with
the Exchange Act. The Commission recognizes that some commenters raised
concerns about the proposed changes to the non-cash compensation rules
on the basis that FINRA suggested that contests based on sales of
securities within particular product categories would no longer be
permitted under Reg BI.\59\ The Commission further recognizes FINRA's
response and Amendment No. 1, and believes that the Amendment No. 1
appropriately addresses commenters' concerns by clarifying that the
proposed changes to its non-cash compensation rules are to be read
consistent with Reg BI.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ See FSI Letter and IRI Letter.
    \60\ See FINRA Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that FINRA's proposed rule change, as
amended by Amendment No. 1, facilitates consistency between FINRA's
non-cash compensation rules and Reg BI. In particular, the relevant
FINRA rules as amended will be consistent with the applicable
requirements under Reg BI. As described above, commenters raised
concerns that FINRA's proposed rule change would prohibit certain sales
contests that may be permitted under Reg BI. In response, FINRA amended
its proposal to be consistent with Reg BI, but cautioned members not to
conclude that any sales contest that awards non-cash compensation for
sales of securities within particular product categories is per se
permissible under Reg BI.\61\ Similarly, the Commission reiterates
that, while certain practices will not be per se prohibited by Reg BI,
such practices are not per se consistent with Reg BI or other
obligations under the federal securities laws.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ See FINRA Letter.
    \62\ See Reg BI Release at footnote 148.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the approach proposed by FINRA with
respect to its non-cash compensation rules is appropriate and designed
to protect investors and the public interest, consistent with Section
15A(b)(6) of the Exchange Act. In particular, the Commission believes
that the proposed rule change, as amended by Amendment No.1, will help
protect investors and the public interest by clarifying that the
incentives broker-dealers may offer pursuant to non-cash compensation
arrangements under the relevant FINRA rules as amended are consistent
with the applicable requirements under Reg BI. For these reasons, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change to the non-cash
compensation rules is consistent with the Exchange Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder.

IV. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rule
Change

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning whether Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the
Exchange 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-FINRA-2020-007 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-FINRA-2020-007. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-1090, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m.
and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. 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-FINRA-2020-007 and should be
submitted on or before July 15, 2020.

V. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1

    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the thirtieth day
after the date of publication of notice of the amended proposal in the
Federal Register.
    As discussed above, the revisions made to the proposed rule change
in Amendment No. 1 clarify that it was not FINRA's intent to propose
changes to its non-cash compensation rules that would prohibit sales
contests, sales quotas, bonuses or non-cash compensation that are
permissible under Reg BI.\63\ Specifically, FINRA modified its proposal
by not deleting rule text in FINRA Rules 2320 and 2341 that requires
non-cash compensation

arrangements between a member and its associated persons, or between a
non-member company and its sales personnel who are associated persons
of an affiliated member, for the sale of variable insurance products or
investment company securities to be based on the total production and
equal weighting of sales of those products.\64\ FINRA also modified its
proposal by not deleting rule text in FINRA Rules 2310, 2320, 2341, and
5110.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ See FINRA Letter.
    \64\ See id.
    \65\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that this modification responds to the
primary concerns raised by commenters on the proposal and clarifies
that the proposal was intended to be read consistent with Reg BI.\66\
As stated earlier, the Commission believes that the proposed rule
change, as amended by Amendment No. 1, will help protect investors and
the public interest by clarifying that the incentives broker-dealers
may offer pursuant to non-cash compensation arrangements under the
relevant FINRA rules are consistent with the applicable requirements
under Reg BI, thereby ensuring a consistent approach with respect to
conflicts of interest. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause,
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,\67\ to approve the
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ See CAI Letter and FSI Letter. See also FINRA Letter.
    \67\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act \68\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FINRA-2020-007), as
modified by Amendment No. 1, be and hereby is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-13539 Filed 6-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 18, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47065-47067]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20226]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR part 93

[Docket No.: FAA-2006-25755]

Operating Limitations at New York Laguardia Airport

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Extension to order.

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

SUMMARY: This action extends the Order Limiting Operations at New York
LaGuardia Airport (LGA) published on December 27, 2006, as most
recently extended May 25, 2016. The Order remains effective until
October 24, 2020.

DATES: This action is effective on September 18, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Requests may be submitted by mail to the Slot Administration
Office, System Operations Services, AJR-0, Room 300W, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by email to: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions concerning this Order
contact: Bonnie C. Dragotto, Regulations Division, FAA Office of the
Chief Counsel, AGC-240, Room 916N, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You may obtain an electronic copy using the internet by:
    (1) Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
    (2) Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or
    (3) Accessing the Government Printing Office's web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
    You also may obtain a copy by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. Make
sure to identify the amendment number or docket number of this
rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA has historically limited the number of arrivals and
departures at LGA during peak demand periods through the implementation
of the High Density Rule (HDR), to address constraints based on LGA's
limited runway capacity.\1\ By statute enacted in April 2000, the HDR's
applicability to LGA operations terminated as of January 1, 2007.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 33 FR 17896 (Dec. 3, 1968). The FAA codified the rules for
operating at high density traffic airports in 14 CFR part 93,
subpart K. The HDR required carriers to hold a reservation, which
came to be known as a ``slot,'' for each takeoff or landing under
instrument flight rules at the high density traffic airports.
    \2\ Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century
(AIR-21), Public Law 106-181 (Apr. 5, 2000), 49 U.S.C. 41715(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA issued an Order on December 27, 2006, adopting temporary
limits pending the completion of rulemaking to address long term limits
and related policies.\3\ This Order was amended on November 8, 2007,
and August 19, 2008.\4\ The FAA extended the December 27, 2006, Order
placing temporary limits on operations at LGA, as amended, on October
7, 2009, April 4, 2011, May 14, 2013, March 27, 2014, and May 25,
2016.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 71 FR 77854.
    \4\ 72 FR 63224; 73 FR 48428.
    \5\ 74 FR 51653; 76 FR 18616, amended by 77 FR 30585 (May 23,
2012); 78 FR 28278; 79 FR 17222; and, 81 FR 33126.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Order for LGA, as amended, the FAA (1) maintains the
current hourly limits on scheduled and unscheduled operations at LGA
during the peak period; (2) imposes an 80 percent minimum usage
requirement for Operating Authorizations (OAs) with defined exceptions;
(3) provides a mechanism for withdrawal of OAs for FAA operational
reasons; (4) provides for a lottery to reallocate withdrawn,
surrendered, or unallocated OAs; and (5) allows for trades and leases
of OAs for consideration for the duration of the Order.
    The reasons for issuing the Order have not changed appreciably
since it was implemented. Runway capacity at LGA remains limited, while
demand for access to LGA remains high. The average weekday hourly
flights are generally scheduled to a level consistent with the limits
under this Order. The FAA has reviewed the on-time and other
performance metrics in the peak May to August 2017 and 2018 months and
found continuing improvements relative to the same period in 2008.\6\
However, the FAA has determined that the operational limitations
imposed by this Order remain necessary. Without the operational
limitations imposed by this Order, the FAA expects severe congestion-
related delays due to the anticipated demand of new operations and the
retiming of existing flights into more desirable hours. The FAA, in
coordination with the Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST),
will continue to consider potential rulemaking in the future to codify
the slot management policies at LGA, and also at John F. Kennedy
International Airport (JFK).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Docket No. FAA-2006-25755 includes a copy of the MITRE
analysis completed for the FAA.
    \7\ Operating Limitations at John F. Kennedy International
Airport. 73 FR 3510 (Jan. 18, 2008), as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current Issues

    The FAA has received specific proposals for policy changes that
would necessitate amending the LGA and JFK Orders. For example, several
carriers have requested a simplified process for the administrative
management of temporary slot transfers, whereby the marketing and
operating carriers would not be required to formally transfer slots for
operation by carriers under common marketing control and whereby the
slot holder could choose whether the holder or the operator would be
responsible for reporting slot usage to the FAA. The FAA is considering
proposing this and other potential changes in a future action on the
LGA and JFK Orders.
    However, the Orders expire at the end of the current summer
scheduling season and carriers are planning winter schedules. There is
insufficient time to publish for comment proposed policy changes,
adjudicate comments, and issue a final Order before the Orders expire.
The FAA has therefore determined to proceed with an extension of the
Orders, without policy changes, to meet current needs and allow time to
further develop any proposed changes to the Orders. Accordingly, the
FAA is extending the expiration date of this Order until October 24,
2020. This expiration date coincides with the extended expiration date
for the Order limiting scheduled

operations at JFK, as also published in today's Federal Register. This
extension of the LGA Order includes minimal changes for clarification
purposes only, including the removal of obsolete references to
rulemaking in paragraph A7. In addition, the description of unscheduled
operations in paragraph B3 and footnote 12 has been revised to provide
greater clarity of existing policy.
    The FAA finds that notice and comment procedures under 5 U.S.C.
553(b) are impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public
interest, as carriers have begun planning schedules for the winter
2018/2019 season and no significant policy changes are included in this
action. For these reasons, the FAA also finds that it is impracticable
and contrary to the public interest to delay the effective date of this
action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d).

The Amended Order

    The Order, as amended, is recited below in its entirety:

A. Scheduled Operations

    With respect to scheduled operations at LaGuardia:
    1. The Order governs scheduled arrivals and departures at LaGuardia
from 6 a.m. through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday and
from 12 noon through 9:59 p.m., Eastern Time, Sunday. Seventy-one (71)
Operating Authorizations are available per hour and will be assigned by
the FAA on a 30-minute basis. The FAA will permit additional, existing
operations above this threshold; however, the FAA will retire Operating
Authorizations that are surrendered to the FAA, withdrawn for non-use,
or unassigned during each affected hour until the number of Operating
Authorizations in that hour reaches seventy-one (71).
    2. The Order takes effect on January 1, 2007, and will expire on
October 24, 2020.
    3. The FAA will assign operating authority to conduct an arrival or
a departure at LaGuardia during the affected hours to the air carrier
that holds equivalent slot or slot exemption authority under the High
Density Rule of FAA slot exemption rules as of January 1, 2007; to the
primary marketing air carrier in the case of AIR-21 small hub/non-hub
airport slot exemptions; or to the air carrier operating the flights as
of January 1, 2007, in the case of a slot held by a non carrier. The
FAA will not assign operating authority under the Order to any person
or entity other than a certificated U.S. or foreign air carrier with
appropriate economic authority under 14 CFR part 121, 129 or 135. The
Chief Counsel of the FAA will be the final decision maker regarding the
initial assignment of Operating Authorizations.
    4. For administrative tracking purposes only, the FAA will assign
an identification number to each Operating Authorization.
    5. An air carrier may lease or trade an Operating Authorization to
another carrier for any consideration, not to exceed the duration of
the Order. Notice of a trade or lease under this paragraph must be
submitted in writing to the FAA Slot Administration Office, facsimile
(202) 267-7277 or email [email protected], and must come from a
designated representative of each carrier. The FAA must confirm and
approve these transactions in writing prior to the effective date of
the transaction. However, the FAA will approve transfers between
carriers under the same marketing control up to 5 business days after
the actual operation. This post-transfer approval is limited to
accommodate operational disruptions that occur on the same day of the
scheduled operation.
    6. Each air carrier holding an Operating Authorization must forward
in writing to the FAA Slot Administration Office a list of all
Operating Authorizations held by the carrier along with a listing of
the Operating Authorizations actually operated for each day of the two-
month reporting period within 14 days after the last day of the two-
month reporting period beginning January 1 and every two months
thereafter. Any Operating Authorization not used at least 80 percent of
the time over a two-month period will be withdrawn by the FAA except:
    A. The FAA will treat as used any Operating Authorization held by
an air carrier on Thanksgiving Day, the Friday following Thanksgiving
Day, and the period from December 24 through the first Saturday in
January.
    B. The FAA will treat as used any Operating Authorization obtained
by an air carrier through a lottery under paragraph 7 for the first 120
days after allocation in the lottery.
    C. The Administrator of the FAA may waive the 80 percent usage
requirement in the event of a highly unusual and unpredictable
condition which is beyond the control of the air carrier and which
affects carrier operations for a period of five consecutive days or
more.
    7. In the event that Operating Authorizations are withdrawn for
nonuse, surrendered to the FAA or are unassigned, the FAA will
determine whether any of the available Operating Authorizations should
be reallocated. If so, the FAA will conduct a lottery using the
provisions specified under 14 CFR 93.225. The FAA may retime an
Operating Authorization prior to reallocation in order to address
operational needs.
    8. If the FAA determines that a reduction in the number of
allocated Operating Authorizations is required to meet operational
needs, such as reduced airport capacity, the FAA will conduct a
weighted lottery to withdraw Operating Authorizations to meet a reduced
hourly or half-hourly limit for scheduled operations. The FAA will
provide at least 45 days' notice unless otherwise required by
operational needs. Any Operating Authorization that is withdrawn or
temporarily suspended will, if reallocated, be reallocated to the air
carrier from which it was taken, provided that the air carrier
continues to operate scheduled service at LaGuardia.

B. Unscheduled Operations 8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Unscheduled operations are operations other than those
regularly conducted by an air carrier between LaGuardia and another
service point. Unscheduled operations include general aviation,
public aircraft, military, irregular charter, ferry, and positioning
flights. Regularly conducted commercial flights require an Operating
Authorization and may not use unscheduled operation reservations.
Helicopter operations are excluded from the reservation requirement.
Unscheduled flights operating under visual flight rules (VFR) may be
accommodated by the local air traffic control facilities and are not
included in the hourly limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to unscheduled flight operations at LaGuardia, the FAA
adopts the following:
    1. The Order applies to all operators of unscheduled flights,
except helicopter operations, at LaGuardia from 6 a.m. through 9:59
p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday and from 12 noon through 9:59
p.m., Eastern Time, Sunday.
    2. The Order takes effect on January 1, 2007, and will expire on
October 24, 2020.
    3. No person can operate an aircraft other than a helicopter to or
from LaGuardia unless the operator has received, for that unscheduled
operation, a reservation that is assigned by the David J. Hurley Air
Traffic Control System Command Center's Airport Reservation Office
(ARO), or for unscheduled visual flight rule operations, received
clearance from ATC. Additional information on procedures for obtaining
a reservation is available via the internet at http://www.fly.faa.gov/ecvrs.
    4. Three (3) reservations are available per hour for unscheduled
operations at

LaGuardia. The ARO will assign reservations on a 30-minute basis.
    5. The ARO receives and processes all reservation requests.
Reservations are assigned on a ``first-come, first-served'' basis,
determined as of the time that the ARO receives the request. A
cancellation of any reservation that will not be used as assigned is
required.
    6. Filing a request for a reservation does not constitute the
filing of an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan, as separately
required by regulation. After the reservation is obtained, an IFR
flight plan can be filed. The IFR flight plan must include the
reservation number in the ``remarks'' section.
    7. Air Traffic Control will accommodate declared emergencies
without regard to reservations. Nonemergency flights in direct support
of national security, law enforcement, military aircraft operations, or
public aircraft operations will be accommodated above the reservation
limits with the prior approval of the Vice President, System Operations
Services, Air Traffic Organization. Procedures for obtaining the
appropriate reservation for such flights are available via the internet
at http://www.fly.faa.gov/ecvrs.
    8. Notwithstanding the limits in paragraph 4, if the Air Traffic
Organization determines that air traffic control, weather, and capacity
conditions are favorable and significant delay is not likely, the FAA
can accommodate additional reservations over a specific period. Unused
operating authorizations can also be temporarily made available for
unscheduled operations. Reservations for additional operations are
obtained through the ARO.
    9. Reservations cannot be bought, sold, or leased.

C. Enforcement

    The FAA may enforce the Order through an enforcement action seeking
a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C. 46301(a). The FAA also could file a
civil action in U.S. District Court, under 49 U.S.C. 46106, 46107,
seeking to enjoin any carrier from violating the terms of the Order.

    Issued in Washington, DC on September 11, 2018.
Jeffrey Planty,
Deputy Vice President, System Operations Services.
[FR Doc. 2018-20226 Filed 9-17-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 7, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66832-66834]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27197]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0390; FRL-9367-3]

Notice of Receipt of Pesticide Products; Registration
Applications To Register New Uses

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of applications to register new
uses for pesticide products containing currently registered active
ingredients pursuant to the provisions of section 3(c) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. This
notice provides the public with an opportunity to comment on the
applications.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 7, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number and the EPA Registration Number or EPA File Symbol of
interest as specified in Unit II., by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A contact person is listed at the end
of each registration application summary and may be contacted by
telephone, email, or mail. Mail correspondence to the Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001. As part of the mailing address, include the contact person's
name, division, and mail code.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Registration Applications

    EPA has received applications to register new uses for pesticide
products containing currently registered active ingredients. Pursuant
to the provisions of FIFRA section 3(c)(4), EPA is hereby providing
notice of receipt and opportunity to comment on these applications.
Notice of receipt of these applications does not imply a decision by
the Agency on these applications. For actions being evaluated under the
Agency's public participation process for registration actions, there
will be an additional opportunity for a 30-day public comment period on
the proposed decision. Please see the Agency's public participation Web
site for additional information on this process (http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/regulating/registration-public-involvement.html). EPA
received the following applications to register new uses for pesticide
products containing currently registered active ingredients:
    1. EPA Registration Numbers: 524-421, 524-475, and 524-537. Docket
ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0132. Applicant: Monsanto Company, 1300 I
Street NW., Suite 450 East, Washington, DC 20005. Active ingredient:
Glyphosate. Product Type: Herbicide. Proposed Uses: Add wiper
applicator use over the top to carrot and sweet potato, add preharvest
use to oilseed crop group 20, add the use Teff (forage and hay), and
conversion of the following old crop groups to the following new crop
groups: Vegetable, bulb, group 3 to vegetable, bulb, group 3-07;
vegetable, fruiting, group 8 to vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10; fruit,
citrus, group 10 to fruit, citrus, group 10-10; fruit, pome, group 11
to fruit, pome, group 11-10; and berry group 13 to berry and small
fruit, group 13-07. Contact: Erik Kraft,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. EPA Registration Numbers: 6836-107 and 71096-13. Docket ID
Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0706. Applicant: Lonza, Inc., 90 Boroline Road,
Allendale, NJ 07401; OR-CAL, Inc., 29454 Meadowview Road, Junction
City, OR 97448. Active ingredient: Metaldehyde. Product Type:
Molluscicide. Proposed Uses: Grass (forage and hay); leaf petioles
subgroup 4B; peppermint and spearmint (tops and oil); berry subgroups
13-07 A, B, and G; taro (corm and leaves); corn (sweet and field); and
soybean. Contact: Marianne Lewis,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. EPA Registration Numbers: 7969-185, 7969-186, 7969-187, 7969-
199, 7969-258, and 7969-289. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0549.
Applicant: BASF Corporation, P.O. Box 13528, 26 Davis Drive, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709. Active ingredient: Pyraclostrobin. Product
Type: Fungicide. Proposed Uses: Artichoke, globe; endive, Belgium;

persimmon; vegetable, bulb, group 3-07; vegetable, fruiting, group 8-
10; fruit, citrus, group 10-10; fruit, pome, group 11-10; oilseed,
group 20; caneberry subgroup 13-07A; bushberry subgroup 13-07B; small
fruit, vine climbing, subgroup (except fuzzy kiwi) 13-07F; and low
growing, berry, subgroup 13-07G. Contact: Dominic Schuler, (703) 347-
0260, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    4. EPA Registration Numbers: 7969-197, 7969-198, and 7969-199.
Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0713. Applicant: BASF Corporation,
P.O. Box 13528, 26 Davis Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.
Active ingredient: Boscalid. Product Type: Fungicide. Proposed Uses:
Artichoke; endive, Belgium; persimmon; vegetable, bulb, group 3-07;
vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10; fruit, citrus, group 10-10; fruit,
pome, group 11-10; berry subgroups 13-07 A, B, F and G; oilseed, group
20; turnip, greens; and vegetable, root, subgroup 1B. Contact: Heather
Garvie,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    5. EPA Registration Numbers: 61842-22, 61842-23, and 61842-24.
Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0791. Applicant: Syngenta Crop
Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419-8300. Active
ingredient: Linuron. Product Type: Herbicide. Proposed Uses: Celeriac;
coriander (cilantro); dill; horseradish; parsley; pea (dry); and
rhubarb. Contact: Mindy Ondish,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    6. EPA Registration Numbers: 62719-99, 62719-131, and 62719-250.
Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0304. Applicant: Dow AgroSciences
LLC, 9330 Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46268-1054. Active
ingredient: Trifluralin. Product Type: Herbicide. Proposed Uses:
Oilseed crop, group 20 (borage, calendula, camelina, Chinese
tallowtree, cuphea, echium, euphorbia, evening primrose, Hare's ear
mustard, jojoba, lesquerella, lunaria, meadowfoam, milkweed, mustard
seed, Niger seed, oil radish, poppy seed, rose hip, sesame, Stokes
aster, sweet rocket, tallow wood, tea oil plant, and vernonia).
Contact: Bethany Benbow,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    7. EPA Registration Numbers: 62719-132, 62719-184, and 62719-188.
Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0303. Applicant: Dow AgroSciences
LLC, 9330 Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46268-1054. Active
ingredient: Ethalfluralin. Product Type: Herbicide. Proposed Uses:
Oilseed crop, group 20 (borage, calendula, Camelina, Chinese
tallowtree, Cuphea, Echium, Euphorbia, Evening primrose, Flaxseed,
Hare's ear mustard, jojoba, lesquerella, lunaria, meadowfoam, milkweed,
mustard seed, Niger seed, oil radish, poppy seed, rose hip, sesame,
Stokes aster, sweet rocket, tallow wood, tea oil plant, and vernonia).
Contact: Bethany Benbow,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pest.

    Dated: October 26, 2012.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-27197 Filed 11-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 172 (Wednesday, September 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54601-54602]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21755]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4079-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2012-0002]

New Mexico; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of New Mexico (FEMA-4079-DR), dated August 24,
2012, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective August 24, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated August 24, 2012, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of New Mexico resulting from flooding during the period of June 22
to July 12, 2012, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant
a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such a major disaster
exists in the State of New Mexico.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds

available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for
Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75
percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Nancy M. Casper, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of New Mexico have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Lincoln and Sandoval Counties and the Santa Clara Pueblo for
Public Assistance.
    All counties and Indian Tribes in the State of New Mexico are
eligible to apply for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2012-21755 Filed 9-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 52 (Friday, March 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 11810]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05343]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Twenty Seventh RTCA SC-214 Standards for Air Traffic Data
Communications Services Plenary

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Twenty Seventh RTCA SC-214 Standards for Air Traffic Data
Communications Services Plenary.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of Twenty Seventh RTCA SC-214 Standards for Air Traffic Data
Communications Services Plenary.

DATES: The meeting will be held April 17, 2018 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held Virtually: https://rtca.webex.com/rtca/j.php?MTID=m93f0cde80b9c1d96d2df6bdfb9aee7c9, Meeting number
(access code): 630 124 113, Meeting password: vJyisXs8.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karan Hofmann at [email protected] or
202-330-0680, or The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW, Suite 910,
Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax at (202)
833-9434, or website at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of the Twenty Seventh RTCA SC-214 Standards
for Air Traffic Data Communications Services Plenary. The agenda will
include the following:

1. Welcome and Administrative Remarks
2. Introductions
3. Agenda Review
4. Previous Meeting Minutes Review
5. Review DO-281C/ED-92C for Final Review and Comment (FRAC)/Open
Consultation Comments (OC) Release
6. Review DO-224D for FRAC Release
7. Decision to Approve Release of DO-281C/ED-92C for FRAC/OC
8. Decision to Approve Release of DO-224D for FRAC
9. Schedule Update
10. Date, Place and Time of Next Meeting
11. Other Topics
12. Adjourn Plenary
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC on March 13, 2018.
Michelle Swearingen,
Systems and Equipment Standards Branch, AIR-6B0, Policy and Innovation
Division, AIR-600, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2018-05343 Filed 3-15-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 20 (Thursday, January 30, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5350-5352]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01575]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2019-1044; Airspace Docket No. 19-ASW-19]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; McAlester, Henryetta, and
Poteau, OK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the Class E surface area
airspace at McAlester Regional Airport, McAlester, OK, and the Class E
airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Henryetta
Municipal Airport, Henryetta, OK; McAlester Regional Airport; and
Robert S. Kerr Airport, Poteau, OK. The FAA is proposing this action as
the result of airspace reviews caused by the decommissioning of the
McAlester VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) navigation aid, which
provided navigation information for the instrument procedures at these
airports. The geographic coordinates of the McAlester Regional Airport
would also be updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.
Airspace redesign is necessary for the safety and management of
instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at these airports.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 16, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; telephone
(202) 366-9826, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2019-1044/Airspace Docket No. 19-ASW-19 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the
proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in
the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except federal holidays.
    FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11D at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend the Class E surface area airspace at McAlester
Regional Airport, McAlester, OK, and the Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Henryetta Municipal Airport,
Henryetta, OK; McAlester Regional Airport; and Robert S. Kerr Airport,
Poteau, OK, to support IFR operations at these airports.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2019-1044/
Airspace Docket No. 19-ASW-19.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic
Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective
September 15, 2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by:
    Amending the Class E surface area airspace at McAlester Regional
Airport, McAlester, OK, by adding an extension within 1 mile each side
of the 020[deg] bearing from the airport extending from the 4-mile
radius to 4.1 miles north of the airport; and updating the geographic
coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical
database;
    Amending the Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to within a 6.3-mile radius (decreased from a 7.1-
mile radius) at Henryetta Municipal Airport, Henryetta, OK; and
removing the Henryetta Medical Center Heliport and associated airspace
from the Henryetta, OK, airspace legal description as the instrument
procedures at the heliport have been cancelled and the airspace is no
longer required;
    Amending the Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at McAlester Regional

Airport, McAlester, OK, by removing the McAlester VORTAC and associated
extensions from the airspace legal description; removing the Wampa LOM
and associated extension from the airspace legal description as it is
no longer required; removing the McAlester Regional Health Center
Heliport and associated airspace contained within the McAlester, OK,
airspace legal description as the instrument procedures at the heliport
have been cancelled and the airspace is no longer required; removing
the exclusionary language from the airspace legal description as it is
no longer required; adding an extension 2 miles each side of the
020[deg] bearing from the airport extending from the 6.5-mile radius to
10.4 miles north of the airport; and adding an extension 2 miles each
side of the 200[deg] bearing from the airport extending from the 6.5-
mile radius to 10.5 miles south of the airport; and updating the
geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database;
    And amending the Class E airspace area extending upward from 700
feet above the surface at Robert S. Kerr Airport, Poteau, OK, by
removing the Rich Mountain VORTAC and associated extension from the
airspace legal description as it is no longer required; removing the
Eastern Oklahoma Medical Center Heliport and associated airspace
contained within the Poteau, OK, airspace legal description as the
instrument procedures at the heliport have been cancelled and the
airspace is no longer required; and removing the city associated with
Robert S. Kerr Airport in the header of the airspace legal description
to comply with changes to FAA Order 7400.2M, Procedures for Handling
Airspace Matters.
    These actions are the result of airspace reviews caused by the
decommissioning of the McAlester VOR, which provided navigation
information for the instrument procedures at these airports.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002 and
6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document
will be published subsequently in the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

     Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as a Surface Area.

* * * * *

ASW OK E2 McAlester, OK [Amended]

McAlester Regional Airport, OK
    (Lat. 34[deg]52'57'' N, long. 95[deg]47'01'' W)

    Within a 4-mile radius of McAlester Regional Airport, and within
1 mile each side of the 020[deg] degree bearing from the airport
extending from the 4-mile radius to 4.1 miles north of the airport.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASW OK E5 Henryetta, OK [Amended]

Henryetta Municipal Airport, OK
    (Lat. 35[deg]24'25'' N, long. 96[deg]00'57'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.3-mile radius of Henryetta Municipal Airport.
* * * * *

ASW OK E5 McAlester, OK [Amended]

    McAlester Regional Airport, OK
    (Lat. 34[deg]52'57'' N, long. 95[deg]47'01'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.5-mile radius of McAlester Regional Airport, and within 2
miles each side of the 020[deg] bearing from the airport extending
from the 6.5-mile radius to 10.4 miles north of the airport, and
within 2 miles each side of the 200[deg] bearing from the airport
extending from the 6.5-mile radius to 10.5 miles south of the
airport.
* * * * *

ASW OK E5 Poteau, OK [Amending]

Robert S. Kerr Airport, OK
    (Lat. 35[deg]01'18'' N, long. 94[deg]37'17'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Robert S. Kerr Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 22, 2020.
Steve Szukala,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2020-01575 Filed 1-29-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 202)]
[Notices]
[Page 59332-59333]
[DOCID:fr19oc07-100]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA-2007-28536]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt seventeen individuals
from its rule prohibiting persons with insulin-treated diabetes
mellitus (ITDM) from operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in
interstate commerce. The exemptions will enable these individuals to
operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions are effective October 19, 2007. The exemptions
expire on October 19, 2009.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of DOT's 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, or other
entity). You may review DOT's

complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register (65 FR 19477,
Apr. 11, 2000). This statement is also available at http://DocketInfo.dot.gov
.

Background

    On August 31, 2007, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of Federal
diabetes exemption applications from eighteen individuals, and
requested comments from the public (72 FR 50443). The public comment
period closed on October 1, 2007, and no comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of the eighteen applicants and
determined that granting the exemptions to seventeen of these
individuals would achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater
than, the level that would be achieved by complying with the current
regulation, 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3).
    FMCSA is awaiting additional medical information regarding Mr.
Ronald C. Vertucci, Jr. from his physician prior to issuing a final
decision on his exemption application.

Diabetes Mellitus and Driving Experience of the Applicants

    The Agency established the current standard for diabetes in 1970
because several risk studies indicated that diabetic drivers had a
higher rate of crash involvement than the general population. The
diabetes rule provides that ``A person is physically qualified to drive
a commercial motor vehicle if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring
insulin for control'' (49 CFR 391.41(b)(3)).
    FMCSA established its diabetes exemption program, based on the
Agency's July 2000 study entitled ``A Report to Congress on the
Feasibility of a Program to Qualify Individuals with Insulin-Treated
Diabetes Mellitus to Operate in Interstate Commerce as Directed by the
Transportation Act for the 21st Century.'' The report concluded that a
safe and practicable protocol to allow some drivers with ITDM to
operate CMVs is feasible.
    The 2003 notice in conjunction with the November 8, 2005 (70 FR
67777) Federal Register Notice provides the current protocol for
allowing such drivers to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
    These eighteen applicants have had ITDM over a range of 1 to 37
years. These applicants report no hypoglycemic reaction that resulted
in loss of consciousness or seizure, that required the assistance of
another person, or resulted in impaired cognitive function without
warning symptoms in the past 5 years (with one year of stability
following any such episode). In each case, an endocrinologist has
verified that the driver has demonstrated willingness to properly
monitor and manage their diabetes, received education related to
diabetes management, and is on a stable insulin regimen. These drivers
report no other disqualifying conditions, including diabetes-related
complications.
    The qualifications and medical condition of each applicant were
stated and discussed in detail in the August 31, 2007, Federal Register
Notice (72 FR 50443). Therefore, they will not be repeated in this
notice.

Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is
likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would
be achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows the applicants
to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
    To evaluate the effect of these exemptions on safety, FMCSA
considered medical reports about the applicants' ITDM and vision, and
reviewed the treating endocrinologist's medical opinion related to the
ability of the driver to safely operate a CMV while using insulin.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that exempting these applicants from the
diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level
of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Conditions and Requirements

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

Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

Conclusion

    There were no comments to the docket, therefore, based upon its
evaluation of the eighteen exemption applications, FMCSA exempts,
Stephen B. Atkinson, Thomas G. Blatchley, Jr., George T. Brawner,
Anthony J. Clark, Jim E. Chester, Brian S. Fenley, Carroll D. Fetcher,
James R. Hudson, Gaines E. Mathis, Thomas F. Meade, Jerry D. Schoolman,
Michael Shuler, Kenneth G. Steinkamp, Mark T. Swanberg, Chad L. Udy,
Jeffrey S. Volkman, and Kendall H. Wilson from the ITDM standard in 49
CFR 391.41(b)(3), subject to the conditions listed under ``Conditions
and Requirements'' above.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 each exemption will
be valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption
will be revoked 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. If the exemption is
still effective at the end of the 2-year period, the person may apply
to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in effect at that time.

    Issued on: October 15, 2007.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E7-20651 Filed 10-18-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P