[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 131 (Friday, July 8, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40439-40443]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17185]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0145]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
Mellitus

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemption from the diabetes mellitus
standard; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 22 individuals
for exemption from the prohibition against persons with insulin-treated
diabetes mellitus (ITDM) operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in
interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable these
individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 8, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0145 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket numbers 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., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the FDMS published in
the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for a 2-year period
if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety
that is equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved
absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the Agency to renew
exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The 22 individuals listed
in this notice have recently requested such an exemption from the
diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), which applies to drivers
of CMVs in interstate commerce. Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate
the qualifications of each applicant to determine whether granting the
exemption will achieve the required level of safety mandated by the
statutes.

Qualifications of Applicants

Bryan K. Aaron

    Mr. Aaron, age 44, has had ITDM since 2011. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Aaron understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a Commercial Motor Vehicle (CMV) safely.
Mr. Aaron meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2011 and certified
that he has nonproliferative stable diabetic retinopathy. He holds a
Class A Commercial Driver's License (CDL) from Utah.

Michael A. Anderson

    Mr. Anderson, 48, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Anderson understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Anderson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2011 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Kansas.

Donald M. Bergman

    Mr. Bergman, 49, has had ITDM since 1993. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Bergman understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Bergman meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2011 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's
license from Minnesota.

Ronald J. Boehm

    Mr. Boehm, 47, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Boehm understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Boehm meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2011 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana.

Ernest E. Bogan

    Mr. Bogan, 61, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Bogan understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Bogan meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Michigan.

Eric B. Bratanich

    Mr. Bratanich, 36, has had ITDM since 1985. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Bratanich understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Bratanich meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he has stable

proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Wisconsin.

Jerry A. Campbell

    Mr. Campbell, 49, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Campbell understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Campbell meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2011 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio.

Paul Dessesow

    Mr. Dessesow, 63, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Dessesow understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Dessesow meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Maryland.

Vernon W. Elmore

    Mr. Elmore, 68, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired
    cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 12
months and no recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the
last 5 years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Elmore understands
diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes
using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Elmore meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2011 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Mississippi.

Michael J. Gilbert

    Mr. Gilbert, 40, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Gilbert understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gilbert meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Washington.

William D. Hanam

    Mr. Hanam, 64, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hanam understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hanam meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2011 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Steven S. Hanna

    Mr. Hanna, 44, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hanna understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hanna meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2011 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Ohio.

Michael M. Harms

    Mr. Harms, 42, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Harms understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Harms meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2011 and certified that he has stable
proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Nebraska.

Johnathan R. Hartman

    Mr. Hartman, 31, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hartman understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hartman meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2011 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Oklahoma.

Devon K. Johnson

    Mr. Johnson, 47, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Johnson understands diabetes
management and monitoring,

has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive
a CMV safely. Mr. Johnson meets the requirements of the vision standard
at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2011 and
certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class
B CDL from Indiana.

Andrew W. Richey

    Mr. Richey, 49, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Richey understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Richey meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Mississippi.

Rob T. Romans

    Mr. Romans, 53, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Romans understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Romans meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2011 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from South Dakota.

Thomas M. Shafer

    Mr. Shafer, 51, has had ITDM since 1984. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Shafer understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Shafer meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2011 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana.

Allen D. Stevenson

    Mr. Stevenson, 45, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Stevenson understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Stevenson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Jersey.

Oleg Tarasov

    Mr. Tarasov, 44, has had ITDM since 2011. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Tarasov understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Tarasov meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Jersey.

Richard H. Willis

    Mr. Willis, 64, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Willis understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Willis meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2011 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Wisconsin.

Harvey N. Woody

    Mr. Woody, 60, has had ITDM since 2006-2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2011 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Woody understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Woody meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL license from Iowa.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. We will consider all comments received before
the close of business on the closing date indicated in the date section
of the notice.
    FMCSA notes that section 4129 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible
and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users requires
the Secretary to revise its diabetes exemption program established on
September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441).\1\ The revision must provide for
individual assessment of drivers with diabetes mellitus, and be
consistent with the criteria described in section 4018 of the
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 31305).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 4129(a) refers to the 2003 notice as a ``final
rule.'' However, the 2003 notice did not issue a ``final rule'' but
did establish the procedures and standards for issuing exemptions
for drivers with ITDM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 4129 requires: (1) Elimination of the requirement for 3
years of experience operating CMVs while being

treated with insulin; and (2) establishment of a specified minimum
period of insulin use to demonstrate stable control of diabetes before
being allowed to operate a CMV.
    In response to section 4129, FMCSA made immediate revisions to the
diabetes exemption program established by the September 3, 2003 notice.
FMCSA discontinued use of the 3-year driving experience and fulfilled
the requirements of section 4129 while continuing to ensure that
operation of CMVs by drivers with ITDM will achieve the requisite level
of safety required of all exemptions granted under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e).
    Section 4129(d) also directed FMCSA to ensure that drivers of CMVs
with ITDM are not held to a higher standard than other drivers, with
the exception of limited operating, monitoring and medical requirements
that are deemed medically necessary.
    The FMCSA concluded that all of the operating, monitoring and
medical requirements set out in the September 3, 2003 notice, except as
modified, were in compliance with section 4129(d). Therefore, all of
the requirements set out in the September 3, 2003 notice, except as
modified by the notice in the Federal Register on November 8, 2005 (70
FR 67777), remain in effect.

    Issued on: July 1, 2011.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-17185 Filed 7-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 23 (Friday, February 3, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7484-7486]
[FR Doc No: 2023-02237]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96773; File No. SR-MEMX-2023-01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MEMX LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Extend the
Exchange's Post-Market Session To End at 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time

January 30, 2023.
    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 January 17, 2023, MEMX LLC (``MEMX'' or the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as
a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change
to amend Exchange Rule 1.5(w), which defines the Post-Market Session,
to allow trading until 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The text of the proposed
rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.

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 Exchange 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 offers three distinct trading sessions during in which
the Exchange accepts orders from Users \5\ for potential execution: (1)
the ``Pre-Market Session,'' which begins at 7:00 a.m. Eastern Time
(``ET'') and continues until 9:30 a.m. ET,\6\ (2) ``Regular Trading
Hours,'' which begin at 9:30 a.m. ET and continue until 4:00 p.m.
ET,\7\ and (3) the ``Post-Market Session,'' which begins at 4:00 p.m.
ET and continues until 5:00 p.m. ET.\8\ Members may designate when
their orders are eligible for execution by selecting their desired
Time-in-Force instruction.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(jj).
    \6\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(x).
    \7\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(bb).
    \8\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(w).
    \9\ See Exchange Rule 11.6(o).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to extend the length of
the Exchange's after-hours trading session by amending Exchange Rule
1.5(w), which defines Post-Market Session, to allow trading until 8:00
p.m. ET. The Exchange notes that it allowed trading in the Post-Market
Session until 8:00 p.m. ET under the Exchange's initial rules \10\ when
it commenced trading operations in September 2020 until the Exchange
modified its operating hours to end trading in the Post-Market Session
at 5:00 p.m. ET in October 2020.\11\ The Exchange shortened its
operating hours to end trading in the Post-Market Session at 5:00 p.m.
ET, instead of 8:00 p.m. ET, because it was a new entrant to the market
at that time and did not believe that the trading volume it was
experiencing during those hours justified the costs to the Exchange to
operate during those hours; however, the Exchange noted in its proposal
to shorten the Post-Market Session to end at 5:00 p.m. ET that ``[t]o
the extent the Exchange in the future believes there is adequate demand
to justify operating a longer after-hours trading session, it will
consider again extending its hours to accommodate such demand.'' \12\
The Exchange now believes that there is adequate demand to justify
operating the Post-Market Session until 8:00 p.m. ET.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88806 (May 4,
2020), 85 FR 27451 (May 8, 2020).
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90119 (October 7,
2020), 85 FR 64536 (October 13, 2020) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Shorten the
Exchange's Post-Market Session To End at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time).
    \12\ See id. at 64537.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed, orders entered for participation in the Post-Market
Session will continue to be handled in the same manner as today, with
the exception that the Exchange will now accept those orders until 8:00
p.m. ET, thereby providing additional time for market participants to
source liquidity outside of Regular Trading Hours. The Exchange
therefore believes that amending Rule 1.5(w) to extend the Exchange's
trading hours will benefit market participants, which will now be able
to trade on the Exchange later in the day. The Exchange also notes that
having a Post-Market Session that lasts from 4:00 p.m. ET until 8:00
p.m. ET, as proposed, is consistent with the after-hours sessions
currently available on several other exchanges, including each of the
equity exchanges operated by Cboe Global Markets, Inc.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See e.g., Cboe BZX Rule 1.5(c); Cboe BYX Rule 1.5(c); Cboe
EDGX Rule 1.5(r); Cboe EDGA Rule 1.5(r).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the change described above, the Exchange also
proposes to make conforming changes to Exchange Rules 1.5(k) and
11.1(a) to reflect the Post-Market Session ending at 8:00 p.m. ET.
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 1.5(k),
which defines ``Exchange Operating Hours'' or ``Exchange Hours,'' to
reflect that the Exchange's daily trading hours, comprised of all three
trading sessions offered by the Exchange, would begin at 7:00 a.m. ET
and continue until 8:00 p.m. ET. The Exchange also proposes to amend
Exchange Rule 11.1(a) to update the hours of operations referenced in
that Rule consistent with the changes described above.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6(b) of the Act,\14\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Sections and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in
particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) requirement that the
rules of an

exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
will benefit market participants by providing additional opportunities
to transact on the Exchange later in the trading day. As described
above, the Exchange currently accepts orders in its Post-Market Session
until 5:00 p.m. ET, while several other exchanges currently have after-
hours sessions that end at 8:00 p.m. ET.\16\ The Exchange believes that
market participants would benefit from a longer Post-Market Session on
the Exchange too, and it is therefore proposing to extend its Post-
Market Session to allow trading until 8:00 p.m. ET. The Exchange
believes that this change will provide additional opportunities for
firms to source liquidity for their orders on the Exchange later in the
trading day and will enable the Exchange to better compete with other
exchanges that offer trading in after-hours sessions until 8:00 p.m.
ET. For the reasons set forth above, the Exchange believes the proposal
would promote just and equitable principles of trade, foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See supra note 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change would not
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers because it would affect all Members and market participants in
the same way and to the same extent, in that all Members would be
allowed to submit orders to the Exchange in the Post-Market Session
until 8:00 p.m. ET, and it is therefore consistent with Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act. Moreover, as described above, the Exchange previously
operated the Post-Market Session until 8:00 p.m. ET under its initial
rules,\17\ other exchanges allow trading in after-hours sessions from
4:00 p.m. ET until 8:00 p.m. ET,\18\ and there is precedent for an
exchange extending the end of its after-hours trading session from 5:00
p.m. ET to 8:00 p.m. ET,\19\ so this aspect of the proposed rule change
does not raise any new or novel issues that have not previously been
considered by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See supra note 10.
    \18\ See supra note 13.
    \19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83809 (August 9,
2018), 83 FR 40599 (August 15, 2018) (notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness of a proposed rule change by Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.
to extend the end of its After Hours Trading Session from 5:00 p.m.
to 8:00 p.m.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange believes the proposed amendments to
Exchange Rules 1.5(k) and 11.1(a) are consistent with the Act because
such amendments would update those rules to reference the proposed 8:00
p.m. ET time as the time until which the Exchange would accept orders
in the Post-Market Session. No further substantive changes to those
rules are proposed. The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to
update all of its rules that specifically reference the Exchange's
operating hours so that the Exchange's rules properly reflect the
change to the Post-Market Session to be implemented with this proposed
rule change.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the Act. The Exchange does not believe
that the proposed rule change would have any significant impact on
intermarket competition, as there are other equity exchanges that
already allow after-hours trading until 8:00 p.m. ET, and other markets
are free to provide similar trading hours. Furthermore, the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change would have any
significant impact on intramarket competition, as all Members would be
subject to the modified hours of the Post-Market Session.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \20\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\21\
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 from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \22\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \23\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \24\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\25\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange asked
that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that the
proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange
states the proposed rule change extends the Post-Market Session on the
Exchange to provide additional opportunities for market participants to
source liquidity later in the day and that its Members would benefit
from the same after-hours trading hours available on other exchanges
(including each of the equity exchanges operated by Cboe Global
Markets, Inc.), which already offer after-hours trading until 8:00 p.m.
ET.\26\ For these reasons, and because the proposed rule change does
not raise any novel regulatory issues,\27\ the Commission believes that
waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby
waives the operative delay and designates the proposal operative upon
filing.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \26\ See supra note 13.
    \27\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88806 (May 4,
2020), 85 FR 27451 (May 8, 2020) at note 155 (noting that MEMX's
initial rulebook when the Commission granted MEMX's registration as
a national securities exchange provided for a Post-Market Session
that ran until 8:00 p.m. ET).
    \28\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change 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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-MEMX-2023-01 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-MEMX-2023-01. 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 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-MEMX-2023-01 and should be submitted on
or before February 24, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-02237 Filed 2-2-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 23, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 56)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 14657-14658]
[DOCID:fr23mr06-14]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2005-0556b; FRL-8046-7]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from components at petroleum
refineries, chemical plants, light crude oil production facilities, and
natural gas production and processing facilities. We are proposing to
approve local rules to regulate these emission sources under the Clean
Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: Any comments on this proposal must arrive by April 24, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2005-0556b, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow

the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov is an

``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send e-mail

directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and
included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment
due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerald S. Wamsley, EPA Region IX,
(415) 947-4111<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposal addresses SJVUAPCD Rules 4403,
4409, 4451, 4452, and 4455. In the Rules and Regulations section of
this Federal Register, we are approving these local rules in a direct
final action without prior proposal because we believe these SIP
revisions are not controversial. However, if we receive adverse
comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
and address the comments in subsequent action based on this proposed
rule. Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not
receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further
information, please see the direct final action.

    Dated: February 16, 2006.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 06-2813 Filed 3-22-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 40948]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17520]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday, July
14, 2011 at 2 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the
scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Walter, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday,
July 14, 2011 will be:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
Adjudicatory matters; and
Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 7, 2011.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-17520 Filed 7-8-11; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 61596]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24831]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL13-1-000]

American Municipal Power, Inc.; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on October 1, 2012, American Municipal Power, Inc.
filed its Revised and Superseding Proposed Revenue Requirement for
reactive supply service under Midwest Independent Transmission System
Operator, Inc. Tariff Schedule 2.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 22, 2012.

    Dated: October 2, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-24831 Filed 10-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 10 (Friday, January 15, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3894-3896]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00019]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1186; Airspace Docket No. 20-AGL-42]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Fosston and Little Falls,
Minnesota

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Fosston Municipal Airport-
Anderson Field, Fosston, MN, and Little Falls/Morrison County Airport-
Lindbergh Field, Little Falls, MN. The FAA is proposing this action as
the result of airspace reviews caused by the decommissioning of the
Fosston and Little Falls non-federal non-directional beacons (NDBs).
The names and geographic coordinates of the airports would also be
updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 1, 2021.

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-2020-1186/Airspace Docket No. 20-AGL-42, 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 7400.11E, 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 7400.11E 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 airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Fosston Municipal Airport-Anderson Field, Fosston,
MN, and Little Falls/Morrison County Airport-Lindbergh Field, Little
Falls, MN, to support instrument flight rule 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-2020-1186/
Airspace Docket No. 20-AGL-42.'' 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 7400.11E, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective
September 15, 2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E 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 airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface to within a 6.3-mile (decreased from a 7-mile) radius of
Fosston Municipal Airport-Anderson Field, Fosston, MN; adding an
extension 1 mile each side of the 341[deg] bearing from the airport
extending from the 6.3-mile radius to 6.5 miles north of the airport;
and updating the name (previously Fosston Municipal Airport) of the
airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database;
    And amending the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to within a 6.5-mile (decreased from a 7-mile) radius
of Little Falls/Morrison County Airport-Lindbergh Field, Little Falls,
MN; and updating the name (previously Little Falls-Morrison County
Airport) and geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the
FAA's aeronautical database.
    This action is the result of airspace reviews caused by the
decommissioning of the Fosston and Little Falls non-federal NDBs which
provided navigation information for the instrument procedures at these
airports.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020, 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 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

AGL MN E5 Fosston, MN [Amended]

Fosston Municipal Airport-Anderson Field, MN
    (Lat. 47[deg]35'34'' N, long. 95[deg]46'25'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.3-mile radius of the Fosston Municipal Airport-Anderson
Field, and within 1 mile each side of the 341[deg] bearing from the
airport extending from the 6.3-mile radius to 6.5 miles north of the
airport.
* * * * *

AGL MN E5 Little Falls, MN [Amended]

Little Falls/Morrison County Airport-Lindbergh Field, MN
    (Lat. 45[deg]56'58'' N, long. 94[deg]20'49'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.5-mile radius of Little Falls/Morrison County Airport-
Lindbergh Field.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 4, 2021.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2021-00019 Filed 1-14-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 186 (Friday, September 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57911-57912]
[FR Doc No: 2015-24454]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0075; Notice 1]

PACCAR, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: PACCAR, Inc. (PACCAR), has determined that certain Peterbilt
and Kenworth trucks do not fully comply with paragraph S9.3.2 of
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, Lamps,
Reflective devices, and Associated Equipment. PACCAR filed an
appropriate report dated June 12, 2015 pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports on June 11, 2015
and revised that report on June 12, 2015.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is October 26,
2015.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the
docket and notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to: U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Deliver: Deliver comments by hand to: U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The
Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except
Federal Holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by: Logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Comments may also be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that
all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
    Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by following the online
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated above will
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see
implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), PACCAR submitted a petition for
an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety.
    This notice of receipt of PACCAR's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    II. Trucks Involved: Affected are approximately 197 MY 2015-2016
Kenworth K270 and K370 manufactured between November 11, 2014 and March
18, 2015 and MY 2015-2016 Peterbilt 220 manufactured between November
10, 2014 and March 18, 2015.
    III. Noncompliance: PACCAR explains that due to a programming error
in the cab controller software in the subject trucks, the turn signal
pilot indicator located on the instrument panel, flashes twice as fast
as the turn signals flash and therefore do not meet the requirements of
paragraph S9.3.2 of FMVSS No. 108.
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S9.3.2 of FMVSS No. 108 requires in
pertinent part:

    S9.3.2 The indicator must consist of one or more lights flashing
at the same frequency as the turn signal lamps.

    V. Summary of PACCAR's Position: PACCAR stated its belief that the
subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
PACCAR states that the purpose of the turn signal pilot indicator is to
assure that the vehicle operator can determine whether the turn signal
system is activated. Thus, PACCAR believes that the pilot indicators in
the subject trucks fully accomplishes that purpose; i.e., they flash
when the turn signal is activated, and they cease flashing when the
turn signal is deactivated (either manually or automatically).
    PACCAR reviewed the agency's decisions on petitions for
inconsequentiality in connection with various noncompliances with turn
signal requirements. While PACCAR did not find any prior decisions that
are similar to this noncompliance, PACCAR believes that NHTSA has
granted previous petitions in connection with turn signal
noncompliances that carried potentially greater safety risks.
    PACCAR is not aware of any crashes or injuries associated with the
noncompliance and it has not received any consumer complaints or
warranty claims related to this issue.
    PACCAR additionally informed NHTSA that after the noncompliance was
discovered, all production of the noncompliant trucks in PACCAR's
possession was put on hold until the software error can be corrected.
    In summation, PACCAR believes that the described noncompliance of
the subject trucks is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that
its petition, to exempt PACCAR from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject trucks that PACCAR no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance

existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve
equipment distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale,
offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of the noncompliant trucks under their control
after PACCAR notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority:  (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: Delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8).

Jeffrey Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-24454 Filed 9-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 37 (Friday, February 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11191-11192]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4374]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA 2012-0015]

Insurance Cost Information Regulation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces NHTSA's publication of the 2012 text and
data for the annual insurance cost information booklet that all car
dealers must make available to prospective purchasers, pursuant to 49
CFR 582.4. This information is intended to assist prospective
purchasers in comparing differences in passenger vehicle collision loss
experience that could affect auto insurance costs.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons may obtain a copy of this booklet or read
background documents by visiting http://regulations.dot.gov at any
time, or visiting 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE. Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Pursuant to section 201(e) of the Motor Vehicle Information and
Cost Savings Act, 15 U.S.C. 1941(e), on March 5, 1993, 58 FR 12545,
NHTSA amended 49 CFR part 582, Insurance Cost Information Regulation,
to require all dealers of automobiles to distribute to prospective
customers information that compares differences in insurance costs of
different makes and models of passenger cars based on differences in
damage susceptibility.

    Pursuant to 49 CFR 582.4, all automobile dealers are required to
make booklets that include this comparative information, as well as
certain mandatory explanatory text that is set out in section 582.5,
available to prospective purchasers. Early each year, NHTSA produces a
new version of this booklet to update the Highway Loss Data Institute's
(HLDI) December Insurance Collision Report.
    NHTSA is mailing a copy of the 2012 booklet to each dealer that the
Department of Energy uses to distribute the ``Gas Mileage Guide.''
Dealers will have the responsibility of reproducing a sufficient number
of copies of the booklet to assure that they are available for
retention by prospective purchasers by March 26, 2012. Dealers who do
not receive a copy of the booklet within 15 days of the date of this
notice should contact Ms. Ballard of NHTSA's Office of International
Policy, Fuel Economy, and Consumer Programs<PHONE_NUMBER> to receive a
copy of the booklet and to be added to the mailing list. Dealers may
also obtain a copy of the booklet through the NHTSA Web page at: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/. From there, click on the Vehicle Safety tab, then
choose the Vehicle-Related Theft category, on that page, under the
Additional Resources Panel, click on 2012 Comparison of Insurance
Costs.

(49 U.S.C. 32302; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50(f).)

    Issued on: February 17, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-4374 Filed 2-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 211 (Monday, November 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67481-67483]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27884]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-2001-9258; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-
2002-11426; FMCSA-2003-14223; FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2003-16241;
FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2007-29019;
FMCSA-2009-0121; FMCSA-2009-0154; FMCSA-2009-0206; FMCSA-2011-0092;
FMCSA-2011-0142; FMCSA-2011-0275; FMCSA-2011-0276; FMCSA-2011-26690;
FMCSA-2013-0022; FMCSA-2013-0166; FMCSA-2013-0169]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

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

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

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

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions are effective from the dates
stated in the discussions below. Comments must be received on or before
December 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. [Docket No. FMCSA-1999-
5578; FMCSA-2001-9258; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2002-11426; FMCSA-2003-
14223; FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2003-16241; FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-
2005-22194; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2007-29019; FMCSA-2009-0121; FMCSA-
2009-0154; FMCSA-2009-0206; FMCSA-2011-0092; FMCSA-2011-0142; FMCSA-
2011-0275; FMCSA-2011-0276; FMCSA-2011-26690; FMCSA-2013-0022; FMCSA-
2013-0166; FMCSA-2013-0169], using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on January
17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

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

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 99 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 99 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. Each
individual is identified according to the renewal date.
    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for
two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. The following group(s) of
drivers will receive renewed exemptions effective in the month of
December and are discussed below.
    As of December 5, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 17 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (66 FR
17743; 66

FR 33990; 68 FR 10301; 68 FR 19596; 68 FR 35772; 68 FR 52811; 68 FR
61860; 70 FR 25878; 70 FR 33937; 70 FR 61165; 72 FR 32705; 72 FR 46261;
72 FR 54972; 72 FR 58359; 72 FR 58362; 72 FR 67344; 74 FR 26461; 74 FR
26464; 74 FR 34630; 74 FR 43217; 74 FR 53581; 74 FR 57551; 74 FR 57553;
76 FR 25766; 76 FR 34135; 76 FR 37168; 76 FR 37885; 76 FR 54530; 76 FR
64169; 76 FR 64171; 76 FR 66123; 76 FR 70212; 76 FR 75943; 78 FR 12815;
78 FR 22602; 78 FR 62935; 78 FR 65032; 78 FR 68137; 78 FR 76395; 78 FR
77782; 78 FR 78477):

Daniel F. Albers (CA)
Keith Bell (FL)
Kevin G. Clem (SD)
David N. Cleveland (ME)
David J. Comeaux (LA)
Tommy R. Crouse (LA)
Albion C. Doe, Sr. (NH)
Mark D. Kraft (IL)
Rocky J. Lachney (LA)
Chase L. Larson (WA)
Herman G. Lovell (OR)
Danny C. Pope (IL)
James B. Prunty (WV)
Rick E. Smith (IL)
Robert E. Smith (CT)
Fred L. Stotts (OK)
Randell K. Tyler (AL)

    The drivers were included in one of the following dockets: Docket
Nos. FMCSA-2001-9258; FMCSA-2003-14223; FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2007-
27897; FMCSA-2007-29019; FMCSA-2009-0121; FMCSA-2009-0206; FMCSA-2011-
0092; FMCSA-2011-26690; FMCSA-2013-0022; FMCSA-2013-0166. Their
exemptions are effective as of December 5, 2015 and will expire on
December 5, 2017.
    As of December 6, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 7 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (70 FR
57353; 70 FR 72689; 72 FR 62897; 74 FR 43217; 74 FR 57551; 74 FR 60021;
76 FR 70210; 78 FR 66099):

John E. Bell (AZ)
Henry L. Chastain (GA)
Thomas R. Crocker (SC)
Thomas C. Meadows (NC)
David A. Morris (TX)
Richard P. Stanley (MA)
Scott A. Tetter (IL)

    The drivers were included in one of the following dockets: Docket
No. FMSCA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2009-0206. Their exemptions are effective
as of December 6, 2015 and will expire on December 6, 2017.
    As of December 13, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following individual, Bernard T. Gillette (PA), has
satisfied the conditions for obtaining a renewed exemption from the
vision requirements (78 FR 62935; 78 FR 76395).
    The driver was included in the following docket: Docket No. FMCSA-
2013-0166. The exemption is effective as of December 13, 2015 and will
expire on December 13, 2017.
    As of December 17, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 8 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (78 FR
62935; 78 FR 76395):

Herbert R. Benner (ME)
Steven M. Hoover (IL)
Lewis J. Johnson (PA)
Michael E. Miles (IL)
Carlos A. Osollo (NM)
Henry D. Smith (NC)
Kolby W. Strickland (WA)
Cesar Villa (NM)

    The drivers were included in one of the following dockets: Docket
No. FMCSA-2013-0166. Their exemptions are effective as of December 17,
2015 and will expire on December 17, 2017.
    As of December 22, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 5 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (72 FR
58362; 72 FR 67344; 74 FR 57553; 76 FR 49528; 76 FR 61143; 76 FR 64164;
76 FR 67248; 76 FR 70212; 76 FR 75940; 76 FR 79761; 78 FR 67460):

Frank E. Johnson, Jr. (FL)
Todd A. McBrain (OK)
Robert E. Morgan, Jr. (GA)
David M. Taylor (MO)
James D. Zimmer (OH)

    The drivers were included in one of the following dockets: Docket
No. FMCSA-2007-29019; FMCSA-2011-0142; FMCSA-2011-0275; FMCSA-2011-
0276. Their exemptions are effective as of December 22, 2015 and will
expire on December 22, 2017.
    As of December 24, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 38 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (78 FR
64274; 78 FR 77778):

Lawrence A. Angle (MO)
Ernest J. Bachman (PA)
Wayne Barker (OK)
Eugene R. Briggs (MI)
Matthew S. Burns (OH)
Ryan J. Burnworth (MO)
Michael D. Champion (VT)
Kevin J. Cobb (PA)
Lee A. DeHaan (SD)
Bradley R. Dishman (KY)
Matthew Eck (PA)
Christopher T. Faber (FL)
Gregory K. Frazier (GA)
John E. Gannon, Jr. (NV)
Thomas G. Gholston (MS)
David B. Jones (FL)
Thomas L. Kitchen (VA)
David G. Lamborn (ND)
Luther D. Long (GA)
George Malivuk (WI)
Stephen R. Marshall (MS)
Edgar H. Meraz (NM)
Chad A. Miller (IA)
William L. Paschall (MD)
Kerry R. Powers (IN)
Glennis R. Reynolds (KY)
Noel S. Robbins (PA)
Joseph Saladino (FL)
Raymond C. Schultz (OH)
Eugene D. Self, Jr., James A. Shepard (NY)
Darren B. Shields (NV)
Roye T. Skelton (MS)
Mark P. Thiboutot (NH)
Robert Thomas (PA)
Herman D. Truewell (FL)
Donald L. Urmston (OH)
Janusz K. Wis (IL)

    The drivers were included in one of the following dockets: Docket
No. FMCSA-2013-0169. Their exemptions are effective as of December 24,
2015 and will expire on December 24, 2017.
    As of December 27, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 17 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (64 FR
27027; 64 FR 51568; 66 FR 53826; 66 FR 63289; 66 FR 66966; 67 FR 10471;
67 FR 19798; 68 FR 64944; 68 FR 69434; 69 FR 19611; 70 FR 48797; 70 FR
53412; 70 FR 57353; 70 FR 61493; 70 FR 67776; 70 FR 72689; 70 FR 74102;
72 FR 39879; 72 FR 52422; 74 FR 37295; 74 FR 48343; 74 FR 49069; 74 FR
60021; 76 FR 75942; 78 FR 67452):

Anthony Brandano (MA)
Stanley E. Elliott (UT)
Elmer E. Gockley (PA)
Danny R. Gray (OK)
Glenn T. Hehner (KY)
Vladmir M. Kats (NC)
Alfred Keehn (AZ)
Randall B. Laminack (TX)
Robert W. Lantis (MT)
Jerry J. Lord (PA)
Ronald S. Mallory (OK)
Eldon Miles (IN)
Neal A. Richard (LA)
Rene R. Trachsel (OR)
Stanley W. Tyler, Jr. (NC)
Kendle F. Waggle, Jr. (IN)
DeWayne Washington (NC)

    The drivers were included in one of the following dockets: Docket
No. FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2002-11426; FMCSA-

2005-21711; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2009-0154. Their
exemptions are effective as of December 27, 2015 and will expire on
December 27, 2017.
    As of December 31, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 6 individuals have satisfied the conditions
for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (66 FR
53826; 66 FR 66966; 68 FR 61857; 68 FR 69434; 68 FR 75715; 70 FR 74102;
71 FR 646; 72 FR 71993; 72 FR 71998; 74 FR 65846; 76 FR 78729; 78 FR
67454; 78 FR 67462; 79 FR 4803):

Martiniano L. Espinosa (FL)
Dustin K. Heimbach (PA)
James G. LaBair (MI)
Lonnie Lomax, Jr. (IL)
Eugene C. Murphy (FL)
John H. Voigts (AZ).

    The drivers were included in one of the following dockets: Docket
No. FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2003-16241. Their exemptions are effective
as of December 31, 2015 and will expire on December 31, 2017.
    Each of the 99 applicants listed in the groups above has requested
renewal of the exemption and has submitted evidence showing that the
vision in the better eye continues to meet the requirement specified at
49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is stable. In
addition, a review of each record of safety while driving with the
respective vision deficiencies over the past two years indicates each
applicant continues to meet the vision exemption requirements.
    These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each
renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by December 2, 2015.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 99 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket numbers FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-
2001-9258; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2002-11426; FMCSA-2003-14223; FMCSA-
2003-15892; FMCSA-2003-16241; FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2005-22194;
FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2007-29019; FMCSA-2009-0121; FMCSA-2009-0154;
FMCSA-2009-0206; FMCSA-2011-0092; FMCSA-2011-0142; FMCSA-2011-0275;
FMCSA-2011-0276; FMCSA-2011-26690; FMCSA-2013-0022; FMCSA-2013-0166;
FMCSA-2013-0169 and click the search button. When the new screen
appears, click on the blue ``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand
side of the page. On the new page, enter information required including
the specific section of this document to which each comment applies,
and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. If you
submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of
the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number
FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-2001-9258; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2002-11426;
FMCSA-2003-14223; FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2003-16241; FMCSA-2005-21711;
FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2007-29019; FMCSA-2009-0121;
FMCSA-2009-0154; FMCSA-2009-0206; FMCSA-2011-0092; FMCSA-2011-0142;
FMCSA-2011-0275; FMCSA-2011-0276; FMCSA-2011-26690; FMCSA-2013-0022;
FMCSA-2013-0166; FMCSA-2013-0169 and click ``Search.'' Next, click
``Open Docket Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments
related to the proposed rulemaking.

    Issued on: October 21, 2015.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-27884 Filed 10-30-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P