[Federal Register: December 19, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 242)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 75093-75096]
[DOCID:fr19de05-27]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2005-MO-0007; FRL-8009-6]

Finding of Substantial Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call
for Missouri State Implementation Plan Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to our authority in the Clean Air Act to call for
plan revisions, EPA is proposing to find that the Missouri State
Implementation Plan for lead is substantially inadequate to attain or
maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for lead in the
portion of Jefferson County within the city limits of Herculaneum,
Missouri. The specific State Implementation Plan deficiencies, which
form the basis for this proposed finding, are described below. If EPA
finalizes this proposed finding of substantial inadequacy, Missouri
will be required to revise its State Implementation Plan to correct
these deficiencies by a date which will be specified in the final rule.
If the state fails to submit a revised State Implementation Plan by the
deadline, it will be subject to sanctions under the provisions of the
Clean Air Act.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 18, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2005-MO-0007, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City,
Kansas 66101.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Amy Algoe-
Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2005-MO-0007. EPA's policy is that all comments received 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 information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov

or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''

system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured

and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
    Docket. All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection

Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street,
Kansas City, Kansas. EPA requests that you contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your
inspection. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents
should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in
advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Algoe-Eakin at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This section provides
additional information by addressing the following questions:

What is the background for Doe Run-Herculaneum?
What is the basis for the proposed finding?
How can Missouri correct the inadequacy and when must the correction
be submitted?
What action is EPA proposing?

What is the background for Doe Run-Herculaneum?

    EPA established the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
for lead on October 5, 1978 (43 FR 46246). The standard for lead is set
at a level of 1.5 micrograms ([mu]g) of lead per cubic meter
(m3) of air, averaged over a calendar quarter.
    During the 1980s and 1990s, Missouri submitted and EPA approved a
number of SIP revisions for lead to address ambient lead problems in
various areas of the state. One such area was in Herculaneum, Missouri,
which is the site of the Doe Run primary lead smelter. Doe Run-
Herculaneum is the largest and only currently operating primary lead
smelter in the United States.
    The city of Herculaneum was designated nonattainment for lead in
1991 (40 CFR 81.326), pursuant to new authorities provided by the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA or Act), and the state became subject
to new State Implementation Plan (SIP) requirements in part D, Title I
of the Act, added by the 1990 amendments. A revised SIP meeting the
part D requirements was subsequently

submitted in 1994. The plan established June 30, 1995, as the date by
which the Herculaneum area was to have attained compliance with the
lead standard. However, the plan did not result in attainment of the
standard and observed lead concentrations in the Herculaneum area
continued to show violations of the standard. Therefore, on August 15,
1997, after taking and responding to public comments, EPA published a
notice in the Federal Register finding that the Herculaneum
nonattainment area had failed to attain the lead standard by the June
30, 1995, deadline (62 FR 43647).
    On January 10, 2001, Missouri submitted a revised SIP to EPA for
the Doe Run-Herculaneum area. The SIP revision was found complete on
January 12, 2001. The SIP established August 14, 2002, as the
attainment date for the area and satisfied the nonattainment area
requirements in the CAA. EPA approved the 2001 SIP on May 16, 2002 (67
FR 18497). The SIP contained control measures to reduce lead emissions
to attain the standard, and contingency measures, as required by
section 172(c)(9) of the Act, to achieve emission reductions in the
event of future violations. Control measures included: (1) The use of a
standard operating procedures manual for all baghouses used to control
process, process fugitive, or fugitive dust emission sources for lead;
(2) installation of emission control equipment; (3) enclosure and
ventilation projects to reduce lead emissions; (4) process throughput
restrictions and hours of operation limitation; and (5) work practice
standards. In addition, the plan outlined contingency measures that
would be implemented in the event that there were future violations of
the lead standard in Herculaneum. The first contingency measure
included enclosures and installation of additional process controls.
This measure was to be implemented within six months following the
calendar quarter in which the violation occurred. If there was a second
violation of the quarterly lead standard, after the implementation of
the initial contingency measure, Doe Run-Herculaneum would curtail
production utilizing one of three emission and/or production curtailing
methods: Method (1), reduce main non-stack emissions by 20 percent;
Method (2), limit production to 50,000 short tons/quarter of refined
lead produced; and Method (3), adopt Method 1 and limit production of
refined lead production based upon the following formula:

P = 50,000 + (500 x (1-A/E) x 100)
P = refined lead production in short tons/quarter;
A = the aggregate actual quarterly emissions from all fugitive and
stack lead emission sources at the facility in tons, except from the
main stack (30001);
E = the aggregate estimated quarterly emissions from all fugitive and
stack lead emission sources at the facility in tons; except from the
main stack; where A/E canot be less than .8 or more than 1.0.

    Since the April 16, 2002, Federal Register rule, which approved the
state implementation plan revisions, Doe Run-Herculaneum has
implemented both of these contingency measures. The first contingency
measure was implemented by Doe Run, prior to any actual violations of
the lead NAAQS. Specifically, Doe Run completed the following measures
to address the first contingency measure requirement. Doe Run completed
modification to the cooler baghouse dilution air intake on December 31,
2002, completed modification to roof monitor in the Sinter Plant Mixing
Room with passive filters on October 31, 2003, completed enclosure of
north end of the railcar unloader building to prevent wind blow-through
fugitive emissions on April 31, 2004, completed enclosure of the north
end number 1 trestle and bin storage area on July 31, 2002, and
completed modification of inlet ducting to number 3 baghouse by
removing number 12 fan restriction from ducting on December 31, 2001.
The second contingency measure was implemented as a result of the
second violation of the lead standard in the second calendar quarter of
2005. The option selected by Doe Run-Herculaneum, under the second
contingency measure, is to limit production to 50,000 tons per quarter
of finished lead.
    During the first three calendar quarters of 2005, Doe Run's
production was 42,289 tons of finished lead, 29,757 tons of finished
lead, and 40,619 tons of finished lead, respectively. This production
is below the production limit of 50,000 tons per quarter of finished
lead, which was required by the second contingency measure.

What is the basis for the proposed finding?

    After the August 2002 attainment date, the Herculaneum area
monitored attainment of the lead standard for 10 consecutive calendar
quarters. However, air quality monitors in the area reported
exceedances of the standard in the first three calendar quarters in
2005 even though Doe Run has implemented all control measures contained
in the 2001 SIP revision. Doe Run has also implemented all of the
contingency measures required by the current SIP.
    Doe Run and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR)
operate co-located monitors at the Broad Street monitoring location (in
addition to other lead monitoring locations in the nonattainment area)
and both sample on a daily basis. In the first calendar quarter of
2005, Doe Run's monitor recorded a quarterly value of 1.928 [mu]g/m\3\,
and MDNR's monitor recorded a quarterly value of 1.877 [mu]g/m\3\. In
the second calendar quarter of 2005, Doe Run's monitor recorded a
quarterly value of 1.615 [mu]g/m\3\. In the third calendar quarter of
2005, MDNR's monitor recorded a violation of 1.60 [mu]g/m\3\. These
monitored values have been quality assured by MDNR and properly entered
into the Air Quality System, EPA's repository for ambient air
monitoring data. The values for each of the three quarters exceed the
1.5 [mu]g/m\3\ lead standard, and therefore constitute violations of
the standard for each quarter. Although the violation recorded in the
first calendar quarter of 2005 is the first violation of the lead
standard in Herculaneum after ten consecutive calendar quarters of
``clean'' monitoring data, the Broad Street monitors, in 2003,
experienced quarterly monitoring values that were close to the
standard. In fact, in the first calendar quarter of 2003, both the Doe
Run and the MDNR monitors at Broad Street, recorded values of 1.464
[mu]g/m\3\ and 1.491 [mu]g/m\3\, respectively.
    As such, because the violations recorded in 2005 have occurred
despite implementation of all the control measures contained in the
SIP, including all contingency measures that were to address the
violations, EPA believes the SIP is substantially inadequate to attain
and maintain the NAAQS for lead.

How can Missouri correct the inadequacy and when must the correction be
submitted?

    Section 172(d) of the CAA provides that a plan revision required by
a SIP call under section 110(k)(5) must correct the deficiencies
specified by EPA, and must meet all other applicable plan requirements
under section 110 and Part D of Title I of the CAA. EPA believes that
MDNR must submit several specific plan elements to EPA in order to
correct the inadequacy of the SIP. These specific elements are: (1) A
revised emissions inventory; (2) a modeling demonstration showing what
reductions will be needed to bring the area back into attainment of the
lead NAAQS; (3)

adopted measures to achieve reductions determined necessary by the
attainment demonstration, with enforceable schedules for implementing
the measures as expeditiously as practicable; and (4) contingency
measures meeting the requirements of Section 172(c)(9) of the CAA.
    Section 110(k)(5) of the CAA provides that after EPA makes a
finding that a plan is substantially inadequate, it may establish a
reasonable deadline for correcting the deficiencies, but the date
cannot be later than 18 months after the state is notified of the
finding. Consistent with this provision, we propose to require the
submittal within twelve months following any final finding of
substantial inadequacy. We propose that the twelve-month period would
begin on the date of signature of the final rulemaking. The state and
company officials have been aware of the need for a plan revision for
several months. The state issued notices to the Doe Run Company on
April 22, 2005, September 8, 2005, and November 9, 2005. As a result of
these notices, the state and company officials have held informal
discussions to develop new control measures. Thus, based on the fact
that discussions have already begun on how to correct the violations
and because of the availability of the technical information from past
SIP actions regarding emissions controls and because lead is a
significant public health concern, we believe that twelve months is a
reasonable time period for submission of the revisions. EPA seeks
comments on the proposed deadline and on whether an alternate deadline
should be established.
    Sections 110(k)(5) and 172(d) also provide that EPA may adjust any
deadlines with respect to SIPs that are applicable under the Act,
except that the attainment date may not be adjusted unless it has
elapsed. For lead, the attainment date is as expeditious as
practicable, but no later than five years after the area is designated
nonattainment, or, if applicable, no later than five years after the
date EPA notifies the state that the area has failed to attain the
standard under section 179(c). See section 192(a) and sections
179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2). Neither of these deadlines is applicable to a
finding under section 110(k)(5). For Herculaneum, the attainment date
was August 2002 (five years after the state was notified that the area
failed to attain). Because the attainment date has elapsed, and the
area is currently not attaining the standard, the attainment date must
be adjusted, pursuant to section 110(k)(5) and section 172(d), and the
state must provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable. In
addition, because there is considerable technical information available
from past SIP measures, and discussions between the Doe Run Company and
MDNR have already begun on control measures which can be implemented in
the near term, and the significance of lead as a public health concern,
we propose to establish an attainment date which is two years from the
date of signature of a final rulemaking. We also believe that the
attainment date should not be adjusted to provide more than two years
because the area is well beyond the 2002 attainment date. We request
comment on whether an alternative attainment date should be
established.

What action is EPA proposing?

    EPA proposes the following actions relating to the Missouri SIP for
lead for the Herculaneum nonattainment area:
    1. Find that the SIP is substantially inadequate to attain and
maintain the NAAQS for lead in the area;
    2. Require that Missouri revise the SIP to meet all of the
applicable requirements of section 110 and part D of Title I of the Act
with respect to lead in the nonattainment area;
    3. Require the state to submit revisions to the SIP within twelve
months of the final rulemaking;
    4. Require that the SIP provide for attainment of the lead NAAQS in
the Herculaneum nonattainment area as expeditiously as practicable, but
no later than two years after issuance of the final rule.
    We are soliciting comments on these proposed actions. Final
rulemaking will occur after consideration of any comments.

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). The
Administrator certifies that this proposed action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
    EPA has determined that this proposed action does not include a
Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or
more to either state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or
to the private sector. This action will require the state of Missouri
to revise laws and regulations to meet the NAAQS for lead. This
requirement, even if considered a Federal mandate, would not result in
aggregate costs over $100 million to either the state or local
districts. It is unclear whether a requirement to submit a SIP revision
would constitute a Federal mandate. The obligation for a state to
revise its SIP that arises out of sections 110(a) and 110(k)(5) of the
CAA is not legally enforceable by a court of law, and at most is a
condition for continued receipt of highway funds. Therefore, it is
possible to view an action requiring such a submittal as not creating
any enforceable duty within the meaning of section 421(5)(9a)(I) of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 658 (a)(I)). Even if it
did, the duty could be viewed as falling within the exception for a
condition of Federal assistance under section 421(5)(a)(i)(I) of UMRA
(2 U.S.C. 658 (5)(a)(i)(I)).
    This proposed action also does not have tribal implications because
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), because it is in keeping with the relationship and the
distribution of power and responsibilities between EPA and the states
as established by the CAA. This proposed SIP call is required by the
CAA because the current SIP is inadequate to attain the lead NAAQS.
Missouri's direct compliance costs will not be substantial because the
proposed SIP call requires Missouri to submit only those revisions
necessary to address the SIP deficiency and applicable CAA
requirements.
    This proposed action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.
    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
of 1995

requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing technical standards when
developing a new regulation. To comply with the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary
consensus standards'' (VCS) if available and applicable when developing
programs and policies unless doing so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. In making a finding of a SIP
deficiency, EPA's role is to review existing information against
previously established standards (in this case, what constitutes a
violation of the lead standard). In this context, there is no
opportunity to use VCS. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) do not apply.
    This proposed action does not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: December 9, 2005.
James B. Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 05-24201 Filed 12-16-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 52 (Tuesday, March 17, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 15249]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05537]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. 2020-02]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Pitman Air
LLC

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of
this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary
is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final
disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before April 6, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2020-0001
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan Blatchford<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 11, 2020.
Brandon Roberts,
Acting Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2020-0001.
    Petitioner: Pitman Air LLC.
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  91.309(a)(1),
61.69(a)(1), and 61.315(c)(18).
    Description of Relief Sought: The Petitioner seeks relief from the
aforementioned sections of the Code of Federal Regulations to allow
pilots-in-command who possess a sport pilot certificate, private pilot
certificate or higher, with a valid Driver's License in lieu of a
Medical Certificate, to operate aircraft certificated as Special Light
Sport Aircraft (SLSA) or Experimental Light Sport Aircraft (ELSA), such
as ``Dragonfly'' and ``Dragonfly Rancher,'' to tow Unpowered
Ultralights (i.e. hang-gliders), Light Sport Gliders and other Light
Gliders.

[FR Doc. 2020-05537 Filed 3-16-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: May 23, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 99)]
[Notices]
[Page 29701-29702]
[DOCID:fr23my06-97]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53822; File No. SR-Phlx-2006-32]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Zero Bid Options

May 17, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on May 16, 2006, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``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 proposed rule change as a ``non-controversial'' rule change
under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act,\3\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Phlx proposes to amend Exchange Rule 1080(i) to provide that
the Exchange's Automated Options Market (AUTOM) System \4\ will only
convert a market order to sell in a ``zero-bid option'' \5\ into a
limit order to sell such option at $0.05 if the Exchange's best bid/
offer (the ``PBBO'') has a bid/ask differential of less than or equal
to $0.25 and (i) the National Best Bid or Offer (``NBBO'') reflects a
zero bid in an option listed on multiple exchanges or (ii) the
Exchange's disseminated bid is zero for an option listed only on the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ AUTOM is the Exchange's electronic order delivery, routing,
execution and reporting system, which provides for the automatic
entry and routing of equity option and index option orders to the
Exchange trading floor. Orders delivered through AUTOM may be
executed manually, or certain orders are eligible for AUTOM's
automatic execution features, AUTO-X, Book Sweep and Book Match.
Equity option and index option specialists are required by the
Exchange to participate in AUTOM and its features and enhancements.
Option orders entered by Exchange members into AUTOM are routed to
the appropriate specialist unit on the Exchange trading floor. AUTOM
is today more commonly referred to as Phlx XL. See Exchange Rule
1080.
    \5\ A ``zero-bid option'' is an option with a bid price of zero,
meaning the option is virtually worthless. According to the
Exchange, a bid price of zero typically occurs in situations where
there is no intrinsic value in the series quoted (i.e., where an
option series is out-of-the-money by a relatively large amount and
such series is close to expiration).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is set forth below. Italics
indicates new text; deletions are bracketed.
* * * * *
Philadelphia Stock Exchange Automated Options Market (AUTOM) and
Automatic Execution System (AUTO-X)
    Rule 1080. (a)--(h) No change.
    (i) Zero-bid option series. The AUTOM System will convert market
orders to sell a particular option series to limit orders to sell with
a limit price of $.05 that are received when:
    (A) For options listed only on the Exchange:
    (1) the Exchange's disseminated bid price in such option series is
zero;[,] and
    (2) the Exchange's disseminated quotation in the series has a bid/
ask differential less than or equal to $0.25; or
    (B) For options that are listed on multiple exchanges:
    (1) the disseminated NBBO includes a bid price of zero in the
series; and
    (2) the Exchange's disseminated quotation in the series has a bid/
ask differential less than or equal to $0.25.

[to limit orders to sell with a limit price of $.05] Such orders will
be automatically placed on the limit order book in price-time priority.
    (j)-(l) No change.
    Commentary: No change.
* * * * *

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, Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    According to the Exchange, the purpose of the proposed rule change
is to modify Exchange Rule 1080(i) so as to limit the circumstances in
which AUTOM will convert a market order to sell into a limit order to
sell a zero-bid option at $0.05. The Exchange adopted Rule 1080(i) as a
means of automating the handling of these orders.\6\ Currently,
Exchange Rule 1080(i) provides for the conversion of all market orders
to sell that are received when the Exchange is disseminating a bid of
zero in that option.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51544 (April 14,
2005), 70 FR 20613 (April 20, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-03).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the adoption of Exchange Rule 1080(i), the Exchange has
concluded that not all options with a zero bid are the same. The
Exchange currently treats options that have an offer price of a few
dollars on the Exchange, as well as options that are not ``zero-bid''
on other exchanges, as zero-bid options. Accordingly, this proposal
outlines additional factors that the Exchange would consider when
determining whether an option is a zero-bid option for purposes of Rule
1080(i), including the Exchange's spread and the NBBO. The Exchange
believes that the new criteria would clarify when an option is truly a
zero-bid option for which orders in that option should be subject to
automated handling versus orders for non-zero-bid options that would
require manual handling.
    The Exchange believes that taking the spread into consideration
would help limit the conversion of market orders to sell to only those
for true zero-bid options, because options with an offer much higher
than above $0.25 are likely not to be worthless options. Similarly, for
options traded on more than one exchange, the NBBO is relevant for
validating whether an option truly is a zero-bid option.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \7\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \8\ in particular, in that it
is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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, by limiting the instances in which
the Exchange's AUTOM system converts a market order to sell an option
that is not a zero-bid option series under Rule 1080(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited
nor received.

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

    Because the proposed rule change: (i) Does not significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not
impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) by its terms,
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing, the
proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \9\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\10\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the five-day
pre-filing notice requirement and the 30-day operative delay. The
Commission believes waiving the five-day pre-filing notice and the 30-
day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. Such waivers would allow the Exchange to
implement, without undue delay, the proposed amendment to Exchange Rule
1080(i), which would clarify when an option is truly a zero-bid option
for which orders in that option should be subject to automated handling
versus orders for non-zero-bid options that would require manual
handling. For this reason, the Commission designates the proposal to be
effective and operative upon filing with the Commission.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For purposes only of waiving the operative date of this
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-Phlx-2006-32 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-32. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-Phlx-2006-32 and should be submitted on or before June
13, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-7819 Filed 5-22-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 36 (Thursday, February 25, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11415-11417]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03659]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0860; Product Identifier 2019-SW-005-AD; Amendment
39-21416; AD 2021-03-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Textron Canada Limited (Type
Certificate Previously Held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited)
Helicopters

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bell Textron Canada Limited (type certificate previously held
by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited) Model 429 helicopters. This
AD was prompted by the introduction of a new life limit for the
centrifugal force bearing (CFB). This AD requires determining the
accumulated retirement index number (RIN) and removing each affected
CFB from service before it accumulates 8,000 total RIN. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective April 1, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bell Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir, Mirabel,
Quebec J7J 1R4; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 450-433-
0272; or at https://www.bellcustomer.com. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. You
may view this service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort
Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0860; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Fuller, AD Program Manager,
Continued Operational Safety Branch, Airworthiness Products Section,
General Aviation and Rotorcraft Unit, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort
Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, issued Transport Canada AD CF-2019-03, dated
January 31, 2019 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition
for certain Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited (now Bell Textron
Canada Limited) Model 429 helicopters. TCCA advises that an
airworthiness limitations schedule document introduces a new life limit
for CFB part number (P/N) 429-310-003-103, a component that was not
previously included. Failure to observe the CFB life limit could result
in excessive vibration and loss of control of the helicopter. You may
examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0860.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bell Helicopter
Textron Canada Limited (now Bell Textron Canada Limited) Model 429
helicopters. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on October 1,
2020 (85 FR 61879). The NPRM was prompted by the introduction of a new
life limit for the CFB. The NPRM proposed to require determining the
accumulated RIN and removing each affected CFB from service before it
accumulates 8,000 total RIN. The FAA is issuing this AD to address a
CFB remaining in service beyond its fatigue life. Failure to observe
the CFB life limit could result in excessive vibration and loss of
control of the helicopter. See the MCAI for additional background
information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed,
except for minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these
minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Other Related Service Information

    Bell Helicopter has issued Bell Model 429 Maintenance Planning
Information BHT-429-MPI, Chapter 4, Airworthiness Limitations Schedule,
DMC-429-A-04-00-00-00A-288A-A, Issue 1, dated January 10, 2019. This
service information describes new maintenance requirements and
airworthiness limitations.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 85 helicopters of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                  Labor cost                               Parts cost               helicopter       operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
28 work-hours x $85 per hour = $2,380.........  $42,576 ($10,644 per bearing x 4         $44,956      $3,821,260
                                                 blades).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. 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.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2021-03-13 Bell Textron Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously
Held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited): Amendment 39-21416;
Docket No. FAA-2020-0860; Product Identifier 2019-SW-005-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective April 1, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bell Textron Canada Limited (type certificate
previously held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited) Model 429
helicopters, certificated in any category, serial numbers 57001
through 57351 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code 6200, Main rotor
system.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the introduction of a new life limit for
the centrifugal force bearing (CFB). The FAA is issuing this AD to
address a CFB remaining in service beyond its fatigue life. Failure
to observe the CFB life limit could result in excessive vibration
and loss of control of the helicopter.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Required Actions

    For each CFB having part number 429-310-003-103 (the affected
CFB): Within 50 hours time-in-service, determine the accumulated
retirement index number (RIN). For purposes of this AD, count 1 RIN
each time one or both engines are started. If any affected CFB has
accumulated 8,000 or more total RIN, before further flight, remove
the affected CFB from service. If any affected CFB has accumulated
less than 8,000 total RIN, create a component history card or
equivalent record indicating a life limit of 8,000 total RIN.
Thereafter, continue to count RIN and record the life limit of the
affected CFB on its component history card or equivalent record and
remove the affected CFB from service before accumulating 8,000 total
RIN.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section,
send it to: Manager, Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, FAA, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector,

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.

(i) Related Information

    (1) The subject of this AD is addressed in Transport Canada AD
CF-2019-03, dated January 31, 2019. This Transport Canada AD may be
found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2020-0860.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Matt Fuller, AD
Program Manager, Continued Operational Safety Branch, Airworthiness
Products Section, General Aviation and Rotorcraft Unit, FAA, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) Bell Model 429 Maintenance Planning Information BHT-429-MPI,
Chapter 4, Airworthiness Limitations Schedule, DMC-429-A-04-00-00-
00A-288A-A, Issue 1, dated January 10, 2019, which is not
incorporated by reference, contains additional information about the
subject of this AD. For service information identified in this AD
that is not incorporated by reference, contact Bell Textron Canada
Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir, Mirabel, Quebec J7J 1R4; telephone
(450) 437-2862 or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at https://www.bellcustomer.com.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued on January 28, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-03659 Filed 2-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17728-17734]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07314]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0032]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
Mellitus

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 43 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 May 12, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0032 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.,
e.t., 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., e.t., 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: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. 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 43 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
statute.

II. Qualifications of Applicants

Lucas L.R. Adams

    Mr. Adams, 38, has had ITDM since 1987. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Adams understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Adams meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2016 and certified that he has stable
proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from
Nebraska.

Ronald E. Allen, Jr.

    Mr. Allen, 62, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Allen understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Allen meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from California.

Kevin N. Blair

    Mr. Blair, 58, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Blair understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Blair meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Kansas.

Justin D. Bodily

    Mr. Bodily, 34, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Bodily understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Bodily meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2016 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Idaho.

George C. Burbach

    Mr. Burbach, 34, has had ITDM since 1988. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Burbach understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Burbach meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from California.

Paul T. Caputo

    Mr. Caputo, 51, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Caputo understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Caputo meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana.

Frederic J. Conti

    Mr. Conti, 52, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Conti understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Conti meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Joshua L. Crider

    Mr. Crider, 36, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Crider understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using

insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Crider meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.

Culley R. Despain

    Mr. Despain, 53, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Despain understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Despain meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Missouri.

Mitchell F. Durkan

    Mr. Durkan, 49, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Durkan understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Durkan meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Colorado.

Ray A. Espinoza

    Mr. Espinoza, 49, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Espinoza understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Espinoza meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from California.

Christopher J. Fisher

    Mr. Fisher, 38, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Fisher understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Fisher meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Oregon.

Jacob L. Flatt

    Mr. Flatt, 25, has had ITDM since 2011. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Flatt understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Flatt meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Oklahoma.

Terry Fleharty

    Mr. Fleharty, 71, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Fleharty understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Fleharty meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Mexico.

Kevin P. Fulcher

    Mr. Fulcher, 61, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Fulcher understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Fulcher meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Massachusetts.

Michael F. Fulton

    Mr. Fulton, 66, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Fulton understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Fulton meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Arizona.

Ivan R. Grove

    Mr. Grove, 58, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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.
Grove understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable
control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV
safely. Mr. Grove meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49
CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and
certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He
holds an operator's license from Pennsylvania.

Nathanial M.I. Hicks

    Mr. Hicks, 35, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Hicks understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hicks meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Oregon.

Daniel J. Lacroix

    Mr. Lacroix, 42, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Lacroix understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Lacroix meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Massachusetts.

Kenneth S. LeColst

    Mr. LeColst, 67, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. LeColst understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. LeColst meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Massachusetts.

John G. Liebl

    Mr. Liebl, 55, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Liebl understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Liebl meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.

William E. McClain

    Mr. McClain, 58, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. McClain understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. McClain meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.

Kevon T. McCray

    Mr. McCray, 27, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. McCray understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. McCray meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from North Carolina.

Rodney G. Moore

    Mr. Moore, 68, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Moore understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Moore meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Washington.

Brian M. Morel

    Mr. Morel, 57, has had ITDM since 1989. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Morel understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Morel meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from New
Jersey.

Keith E. Newbauer

    Mr. Newbauer, 61, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Newbauer understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Newbauer meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Indiana.

Herbert L. Redd

    Mr. Redd, 66, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2016 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. Redd understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Redd meets the requirements of the
vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him
in 2016 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds an operator's license from Indiana.

Quentin M. Rembert

    Mr. Rembert, 28, has had ITDM since 1998. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Rembert understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Rembert meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Wisconsin.

Philip J. Richard

    Mr. Richard, 54, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Richard understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Richard meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Lars A. Sandaker

    Mr. Sandaker, 46, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Sandaker understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sandaker meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Minnesota.

John E. Sargent, Jr.

    Mr. Sargent, 59, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Sargent understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sargent meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Massachusetts.

Kevin R. Sewell

    Mr. Sewell, 24, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Sewell understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sewell meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from North
Carolina.

Donald J. Smith

    Mr. Smith, 41, has had ITDM since 1998. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Smith understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smith meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Vermont.

Larry D. Smith

    Mr. Smith, 64, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Smith understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using

insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smith meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Tennessee.

Warren A. Smith

    Mr. Smith, 58, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Smith understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smith meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Jersey.

Daniel J. Spauling

    Mr. Spauling, 58, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Spauling understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Spauling meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Idaho.

Russell D. Swanson

    Mr. Swanson, 63, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2016 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. Swanson understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Swanson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from South Dakota.

Scot D. Thompson

    Mr. Thompson, 57, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Thompson understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Thompson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.

Wayne F. Todd

    Mr. Todd, 56, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2016 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. Todd understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Todd meets the requirements of the
vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him
in 2016 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds a Class A CDL from Nebraska.

Harold W. Trombly, III

    Mr. Trombly, 40, has had ITDM since 1991. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Trombly understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Trombly meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Massachusetts.

Steven L. Welker

    Mr. Welker, 49, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Welker understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Welker meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.

Christopher U. Williams

    Mr. Williams, 41, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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. Williams understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Williams meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2016 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from
Louisiana.

Craig L. Woodard

    Mr. Woodard, 53, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2017 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.
Woodard understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable
control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV
safely. Mr. Woodard meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49
CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2016 and
certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class
A CDL from Ohio.

III. 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.

IV. 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 number FMCSA-2017-0032 and click
the search button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue
``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand side of the page. On the new
page, enter information required including the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period. FMCSA may issue a final determination at any time after
the close of the comment period.

V. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert
the docket number FMCSA-2017-0032 and click ``Search.'' Next, click
``Open Docket Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments
related to this notice.

    Issued on: March 30, 2017.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-07314 Filed 4-11-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P