[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 22 (Friday, February 1, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7261-7262]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01820]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1071; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-070-AD;
Amendment 39-17332; AD 2013-02-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A310-203 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of an
analysis that demonstrated a reduced fatigue life for the side link
bolts, center sway link bolts, and thrust link bolts on the forward
engine mounts. This AD requires repetitive replacement of those bolts.
We are issuing this AD to prevent deterioration of the structural
integrity of the bolts, which could result in possible damage to an
engine or wing.

DATES: This AD becomes effective March 8, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 8,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on October 16, 2012 (77
FR 63268). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) states:

    Post type-certification analyses performed in the frame of the
Extended Service Goal (ESG) exercise, demonstrated a reduced fatigue
life for the side link bolts, centre sway link bolts and thrust link
bolts of the General Electric (GE) CF6-80A3 forward engine mounts.
    This condition, if left uncorrected, could result in a
deterioration of the structural integrity of the front engine mount
bolts [and possible damage to an engine or wing].
    For the reasons described above, this [European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA)] AD requires [repetitive] replacement of all side link
bolts, centre sway link bolts and all thrust link bolts of GE CF6-
80A3 powered aeroplanes.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (77 FR 63268, October 16,
2012) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 30 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 139 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $4,810 per
product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that
are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the
U.S. operators to be $498,750, or $16,625 per product.

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.
    We are 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

    We determined that 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. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM (77 FR 63268, October 16,
2012), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

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 AD:

2013-02-11 Airbus: Amendment 39-17332. Docket No. FAA-2012-1071;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-070-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective March 8,
2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus Model A310-203 airplanes,
certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 71, Powerplant.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of an analysis that
demonstrated a reduced fatigue life for the side link bolts, center
sway link bolts, and thrust link bolts on the forward engine mounts.
We are issuing this AD to prevent deterioration of the structural
integrity of the bolts, which could result in possible damage to an
engine or wing.

(f) Compliance

    You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD
performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions
have already been done.

(g) Actions

    Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, replace
all side link bolts on left hand (LH) and right hand (RH) side of
the engines, and all center sway link bolts and thrust link bolts of
both engines, having any part number (P/N) identified in paragraphs
(g)(1) through (g)(6) of this AD, with new bolts having the same
part number, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-71-2037, including Appendices
01 and 02, dated September 30, 2011. Repeat the bolt replacements
thereafter at intervals not exceeding 134 months.
    (1) P/N 9021M88P01.
    (2) P/N 9021M88P02.
    (3) P/N 9205M81P01.
    (4) P/N 9021M88P03.
    (5) P/N 9021M88P04.
    (6) P/N 9205M82P01.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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 International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may
be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(i) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2012-0056, dated April 3, 2012; and Airbus Mandatory
Service Bulletin A310-71-2037, including Appendices 01 and 02, dated
September 30, 2011; for related information.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-71-2037, including
Appendices 01 and 02, dated September 30, 2011.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS--EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 17, 2013.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-01820 Filed 1-31-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: February 12, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 28)]
[Notices]
[Page 7093-7097]
[DOCID:fr12fe09-84]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket ID FMCSA-2008-0399]0

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 37 individuals
for exemptions 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 commercial motor vehicles in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 16, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-2008-0399 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket ID for
this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The 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 acknowledgment page that appears after submitting comments
online.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is
also available at http://Docketinfo.dot.gov.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
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 statutes also allow the
Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The 37
individuals listed in this notice have recently requested an exemption
from the diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce. Accordingly, the Agency will
evaluate the qualifications of each applicant to determine whether
granting the exemption will achieve the required level of safety
mandated by the statutes.

Qualifications of Applicants

Michael D. Akers

    Mr. Akers, age 43, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Akers meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A commercial driver's
license (CDL) from Georgia.

Donald J. Altier

    Mr. Altier, 39, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Altier meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.

Richie Anderson

    Mr. Anderson, 38, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring;

and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to
drive a CMV safely. Mr. Anderson meets the requirements of the vision
standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in
2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds
a Class C operator's license from California.

Rick M. Bryant

    Mr. Bryant, 56, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Bryant meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Arizona.

Casey D. Carr

    Mr. Carr, 30, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Carr meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class A CDL from Utah.

David L. Coggin

    Mr. Coggin, 67, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Coggin meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Mexico.

Daniel J. Conner

    Mr. Conner, 49, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Conner meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

James K. Dowden

    Mr. Dowden, 51, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Dowden meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Minnesota.

Luis G. Garcia

    Mr. Garcia, 56, has had ITDM since 1992. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Garcia meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Florida.

Gary A. Garrett

    Mr. Garrett, 61, has had ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Garrett meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.

Joseph M. Godinho

    Mr. Godinho, 34, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Godinho meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C CDL from California.

Gerardo Gonzales

    Mr. Gonzales, 30, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gonzales meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has stable
non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class ABCD
operator's license from Wisconsin.

Darryl B. Goskey

    Mr. Goskey, 68, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring; and has
stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a
CMV safely. Mr. Goskey meets the requirements of the vision standard at
49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and
certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class
A CDL from Minnesota.

Douglas A. Greve

    Mr. Greve, 64, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Greve meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.

Edlyne C. Harrison

    Mr. Harrison, 51, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Harrison meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Alabama.

Edwin L. Haynie

    Mr. Haynie, 53, has had ITDM since 2001. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Haynie meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
Texas.

Darryl D. Hewitt

    Mr. Hewitt, 52, has had ITDM since 1992. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hewitt meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
California.

Mark D. Hoag

    Mr. Hoag, 44, has had ITDM since 1985. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hoag meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a CDL from Washington.

James B. Hodge, Jr.

    Mr. Hodge, 39, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hodge meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Florida.

Kevin J. Hood

    Mr. Hood, 49, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hood meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana.

Charles T. Hughes

    Mr. Hughes, 63, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hughes meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Norman G. Jovin

    Mr. Jovin, 65, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Jovin meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Florida.

Patrick H. Junkins

    Mr. Junkins, 55, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has

stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a
CMV safely. Mr. Junkins meets the requirements of the vision standard
at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008 and
certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class
B CDL from New Hampshire.

Paul A. Kurimski

    Mr. Kurimski, 50, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kurimski meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.

Charles L. Martinez

    Mr. Martinez, 38, has had ITDM since 1988. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Martinez meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Arizona.

Joseph S. Moore

    Mr. Moore, 38, has had ITDM since 1973. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and 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
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has stable
proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class E operator's
license from South Carolina, which allows him to operate a single unit
vehicle exceeding a gross vehicle weight rating of 26,000 pounds except
motorcycles.

Jeffrey D. Moul

    Mr. Moul, 35, has had ITDM since 1998. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Moul meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2008 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class A CDL from South Dakota.

Ellis E. Murdock

    Mr. Murdock, 45, has had ITDM since the late 1980s. His
endocrinologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no
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 5 years; understands
diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control of his
diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Murdock
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has stable
non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Montana.

Richard J. Neeman

    Mr. Neeman, 58, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Neeman meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Minnesota.

Michael A. Potter

    Mr. Potter, 47, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Potter meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Montana.

Carson R. Reighard

    Mr. Reighard, 47, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Reighard meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he has stable
non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Iowa.

Frank B. Rivett

    Mr. Rivett, 62, has had ITDM since 1962. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Rivett meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.

Timothy D. Schaff

    Mr. Schaff, 55, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring;
and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to
drive a CMV safely. Mr. Schaff meets the requirements of the vision
standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2008
and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a
Class DA CDL from Kentucky.

Jeffrey A. Scovel

    Mr. Scovel, 38, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Scovel meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B3 CDL from South Dakota, which
allows him to drive single vehicles greater than 26,000 lbs gross
vehicle weight rating and includes car/light truck/motorcycle
privileges.

Charles C. Smith

    Mr. Smith, 68, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and 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 2008 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.

Michael L. Wise

    Mr. Wise, 58, has had ITDM since 1992. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wise meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he does have stable non-
proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from
Indiana.

Richard L. Wright

    Mr. Wright, 59, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that he has had no 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 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wright meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2008 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana.

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 (SAFETEA-
LU) 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) The elimination of the requirement for
three years of experience operating CMVs while being treated with
insulin; and (2) the 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. FMCSA concluded that all of the
operating, monitoring and medical requirements set out in the September
3, 2003 Notice, except as modified, were in compliance with section
4129(d). Therefore, all of the requirements set out in the September 3,
2003 Notice, except as modified by the Notice in the Federal Register
on November 8, 2005 (70 FR 67777), remain in effect.

    Issued on: February 5, 2009.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
 [FR Doc. E9-2957 Filed 2-11-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 49 (Thursday, March 12, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14472-14473]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05066]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[P-2698-122]

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for
Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Non-capacity amendment to refurbish
turbine-generator unit.
    b. Project No.: 2698-122.
    c. Date Filed: January 27, 2020.
    d. Applicant: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: East Fork Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the east fork of the
Tuckasegee River in Jackson County, North Carolina.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Jeffrey G. Lineberger, Director of Water
Strategy and Hydro Licensing, Duke Energy, Mail Code EC-12Y, 526 South
Church Street, Charlotte NC 28202,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Mr. Steven Sachs,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests
is 30 days from the issuance of this notice by the Commission. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments,
motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission's eFiling
system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/doc-sfiling/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact
information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll
free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please
send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing
should include docket number P-2698-122.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person on the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Request: The applicant proposes to replace the
turbine and rewind the generator at the Tennessee Creek development of
the project. The proposal would increase the total installed capacity
of the project from 23.973 to 25.848 megawatts, and would raise the
hydraulic capacity of the Tennessee Creek development from 261 to 298
cubic feet per second. The applicant does not propose any

operational changes to the project as a result of the rehabilitation.
    l. Locations of the Applications: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. The filing may also be viewed on
the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Motions to Intervene, or Protests: Anyone may submit
comments, a motion to intervene, or a protest in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, motions to
intervene, or protests must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title COMMENTS, MOTION TO INTERVENE, or
PROTEST as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number(s) of the application to which the
filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of
the person intervening or protesting; and (4) otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions
to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis. A
copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be
accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service
list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with
18 CFR 385.2010.

    Dated: March 6, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-05066 Filed 3-11-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12823-12824]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04434]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2017-0009; OMB No. 1660-0062]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; State/Local/Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plans

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity
to comment on a revision of a currently approved information
collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
this notice seeks comments concerning information collection activities
related to Hazard Mitigation Plans.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 8, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
FEMA-2017-0009. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of
Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., 8NE, Washington, DC 20472-
3100.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice that is available via the link in the footer of
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Smith, Chief, Planning and
Safety Branch; Planning, Safety and Building Science Division; Risk
Management Directorate; Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Administration; FEMA<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may contact the Records
Management Division for copies of the proposed collection of
information at email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), 42 U.S.C.
5165, as amended by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000),
Public Law 106-390, provides the framework for linking pre-and post-
disaster mitigation planning and initiatives with public and private
interests to ensure an integrated, comprehensive approach to disaster
loss reduction. Regulations found at 44 CFR part 201 provide the
mitigation planning requirements for State, local, and Indian Tribal
governments to identify the natural hazards that impact them, to
identify actions and activities to reduce any losses from hazards, and
to establish a coordinated process to implement the plan, taking
advantage of a wide-range of resources.

Collection of Information

    Title: State/Local/Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plans.
    Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved
information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660-0062.
    FEMA Forms: Not applicable.
    Abstract: In order to be eligible for certain types of Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) non-emergency assistance, State,
local, and Indian Tribal governments are required to have a current
FEMA-approved hazard mitigation plan that meets the criteria
established in 44 CFR part 201.
    Affected Public: State, local or Tribal government.
    Number of Respondents: 56.
    Number of Responses: 1,579.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 227,366 hours.
    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents is
$31,198,090. The estimated annual cost to the Federal Government is
$1,705,242.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Dated: March 1, 2017.
Tammi Hines,
Acting Records Management Branch Chief, Mission Support, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2017-04434 Filed 3-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-52-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 61 (Monday, March 30, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17609-17610]
[FR Doc No: 2020-06519]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IA-5469/March 25, 2020]

Order Under Section 206a of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940
Granting Exemptions From Specified Provisions of the Investment
Advisers Act and Certain Rules Thereunder

    On March 13, 2020, in response to the potential effects of
coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') issued an order \1\ (the ``Original
Order'') pursuant to its authority under Section 206A of the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940 (the ``Advisers Act'' or ``Act'') granting
exemptions from certain provisions of that Act and the rules
thereunder. The Commission has been monitoring the effects of COVID-19
and is now extending the exemptions with certain modifications in light
of its current understanding of the circumstances. The health and
safety of all participants in the securities markets is of paramount
importance, and the Commission recognizes that investment advisers and
other market participants continue to face challenges in meeting the
requirements of the federal securities laws addressed in the Original
Order in a timely manner. For this reason and the reasons stated in the
Original Order, the Commission finds that extending the exemptions,
pursuant to its authority under Section 206A of the Advisers Act, is
necessary and appropriate in the public interest and consistent with
the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the
policy and provisions of the Advisers Act, and necessary and
appropriate to the exercise of the powers conferred on it by the
Advisers Act. The necessity for prompt action of the Commission does
not permit prior notice of the Commission's action. This Order
supersedes the Original Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Investment Advisers Act Release No. 5463 (Mar. 13, 2020),
available at https://www.sec.gov/rules/other/2020/ia-5463.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Time Period for the Relief

    The relief specified in this Order is limited to filing or delivery
obligations, as applicable, for which the original due date is on or
after the date of the Original Order but on or prior to June 30, 2020.
The Commission intends to continue to monitor the current situation.
The time period for any or all of the relief may, if necessary, be
extended with any additional conditions that are deemed appropriate,
and the Commission may issue other relief as necessary or appropriate.

II. Form ADV and Form PF Filing Requirements for Registered Investment
Advisers and Exempt Reporting Advisers

    As we observed in the Original Order, disruptions resulting from
COVID-19 could hamper the efforts of investment advisers to timely meet
certain filing and delivery deadlines. At the same time, advisory
clients and the Commission have an interest in the timely availability
of required information about investment advisers, and we remind
investment advisers who rely on this Order to continue to evaluate
their obligations, including their fiduciary duty, under the federal
securities laws. In light of our current understanding of the
nationwide scope of COVID-19's disruptions to businesses and everyday
activities, and the uncertainty as to the duration of these
disruptions, we are removing the Original Order's conditions that an
investment adviser that intends to rely upon the relief must (i)
include, in its email correspondence to Commission staff and on its
website, as applicable,

why it is unable to meet a filing deadline or delivery requirement and
(ii) provide an estimated date of filing or delivery completion.
    It is ordered, pursuant to Section 206A of the Advisers Act:
    For the time period specified in Section I, a registered investment
adviser is exempt from the requirements: (a) Under Rule 204-1 under the
Advisers Act to file an amendment to Form ADV; and (b) under Rule 204-
3(b)(2) and (b)(4) related to the delivery of Form ADV Part 2 (or a
summary of material changes) to existing clients, where the conditions
below are satisfied;
    For the time period specified in Section I, an exempt reporting
adviser is exempt from the requirements under Rule 204-4 under the
Advisers Act to file reports on Form ADV, where the conditions below
are satisfied; and
    For the time period specified in Section I, a registered investment
adviser that is required by Section 204(b) of and Rule 204(b)-1 under
the Advisers Act to file Form PF is exempt from those requirements,
where the conditions below are satisfied.

Conditions

    (a) The registered investment adviser or exempt reporting adviser
is unable to meet a filing deadline or delivery requirement due to
circumstances related to current or potential effects of COVID-19;
    (b) The investment adviser relying on this Order with respect to
the filing of Form ADV or delivery of its brochure, summary of material
changes, or brochure supplement required by Rule 204-3(b)(2) or (b)(4),
promptly notifies the Commission staff via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and discloses on its public website (or if it does not have a public
website, promptly notifies its clients and/or private fund investors)
that it is relying on this Order.
    (c) Any investment adviser relying on this order with respect to
filing Form PF required by Rule 204(b)-1 must promptly notify the
Commission staff via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>stating that it is relying
on this Order.
    (d) The investment adviser files the Form ADV or Form PF, as
applicable, and delivers the brochure (or summary of material changes)
and brochure supplement required by Rule 204-3(b)(2) and (b)(4) under
the Advisers Act, as soon as practicable, but not later than 45 days
after the original due date for filing or delivery, as applicable.

    By the Commission.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-06519 Filed 3-27-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: June 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 122)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 36316-36318]
[DOCID:fr25jn10-15]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2010-0113; FRL-9168-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Louisiana; Determination of Attainment of the 1997 Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to determine that the Baton Rouge,
Louisiana moderate 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area has attained
the 1997 8-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for
ozone. This proposed determination is based upon complete, quality
assured, certified ambient air monitoring data that show the area has
monitored attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS since the 2006-2008
monitoring period, and continues to monitor attainment of the NAAQS
based on 2009 data. If this proposed determination is made final, under
the provisions of EPA's ozone implementation rule, the requirements for
this area to submit an attainment demonstration, a reasonable further
progress plan, contingency measures, and other planning State
Implementation Plans related to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS shall be suspended for so long as the area continues to attain
the 1997 ozone NAAQS.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 26, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2010-0113, by one of the following methods:
    Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    U.S. EPA Region 6 ``Contact Us'' Web site: http://epa.gov/region6/
r6coment.htm. Please click on ``6PD``(Multimedia) and select ``Air''
before submitting comments.
    E-mail: Mr. Guy Donaldson at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please also
send a copy by email to the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
    Fax: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), at fax
number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Mail: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas,
Texas 75202-2733.
    Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning
Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Such deliveries are accepted only
between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. weekdays except for legal
holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2010-0113. 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 the
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail that you consider to be
CBI or otherwise protected from disclosure. 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 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 Air Planning
Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file will be made available by
appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review Room
between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal
holidays. Contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT paragraph below to make an appointment. If possible, please
make the appointment at least two working days in advance of your
visit. There will be a fee of 15 cents per page for making photocopies
of documents. On the day of the visit, please check in at the EPA
Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas
75202-2733.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sandra Rennie, Air Planning
Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. What action Is EPA taking?
II. What is the effect of this action?
III. What is the background for this action?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the relevant Air Quality Data?
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Baton Rouge, Louisiana
moderate 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area (hereafter the Baton
Rouge area) has attained the 1997 8-hour National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. This proposed determination is based upon
complete, quality assured and certified ambient air monitoring data
that show the area has monitored attainment of the ozone NAAQS since

the 2006-2008 monitoring period, and monitoring data that continue to
show attainment of the NAAQS based on 2009 data in the Air Quality
System (AQS) database. Preliminary data available to date for the 2010
ozone season are also consistent with continued attainment.

II. What is the effect of this action?

    If this proposed determination is made final, under the provisions
of EPA's ozone implementation rule (see 40 CFR Section 51.918), the
requirements for the Baton Rouge area to submit an attainment
demonstration, a reasonable further progress plan, section 172(c)(9)
contingency measures, and any other State Implementation Plan (SIP)
planning measures related to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
would be suspended for so long as the area continues to attain the
ozone NAAQS.
    This proposed action, if finalized, would not constitute a
redesignation to attainment under CAA section 107(d)(3), because we
would not yet have an approved maintenance plan for the area as
required under section 175A of the CAA, nor a determination that the
area has met the other requirements for redesignation. The
classification and designation status of the area would remain moderate
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS until such time as EPA
determines that it meets all the CAA requirements for redesignation to
attainment.
    If this rulemaking is finalized and EPA subsequently determines,
after notice-and-comment rulemaking in the Federal Register, that the
area has violated the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, the basis for the
suspension of these requirements would no longer exist, and the area
would thereafter have to address the pertinent CAA requirements.

III. What is the background for this action?

    On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), EPA designated as nonattainment
any area that was violating the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the
three most recent years (2001-2003) of air quality data. The Baton
Rouge area (specifically, Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville,
Livingston, and West Baton Rouge Parishes) was designated as a marginal
ozone nonattainment area. The Baton Rouge area was reclassified to
moderate on March 21, 2008, effective on April 21, 2008 (73 FR 15087).
Recent air quality data indicate that the Baton Rouge area is now
attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of the relevant air quality data?

    The EPA has reviewed the Baton Rouge area's 2006-2008 ambient air
monitoring data for ozone consistent with the requirements contained in
40 CFR part 50 and recorded in the EPA AQS database. On the basis of
that review, EPA has concluded that this area attained the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard at the end of the 2008 ozone season, based on three
years of complete, quality-assured and state certified 2006-2008 ozone
data. In addition, ozone data for 2007-2009, also in AQS, show the area
continues to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Under EPA regulations
at 40 CFR part 50, the 1997 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the
3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ozone concentrations at an ozone monitor is less than or equal
to 0.08 parts per million (ppm) (i.e., 0.084 ppm, based on the rounding
convention in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I). This 3-year average is
referred to as the design value. When the design value is less than or
equal to 0.084 ppm at each monitor within the area, then the area is
meeting the NAAQS. (See 69 FR 23857 (April 30, 2004) for further
information.) Also, the data completeness requirement is met when the
average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater
than 90%, and no single year has less than 75% data completeness as
determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50.
    Table 1 shows the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentrations for the Baton Rouge, Louisiana nonattainment area
monitors for the years 2006-2009.

  Table 1--Fourth High 8-Hour Ozone Average Concentrations and Design Values (ppm) in the Baton Rouge Area \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   4th Highest daily max                Design values three year
                                   ----------------------------------------------------         averages
               Site                                                                    -------------------------
                                        2006         2007         2008         2009      2006-2008    2007-2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaquemine (22-047-0009)..........        0.083        0.079        0.076        0.071        0.079        0.075
Carville (22-047-0012)............        0.085        0.086        0.073        0.076        0.081        0.078
Dutchtown (22-005-0004)...........        0.087        0.088        0.074        0.074        0.083        0.078
Baker (22-033-1001)...............        0.091        0.077        0.071        0.071        0.079        0.073
LSU (22-033-0003).................        0.085        0.085        0.072        0.084        0.080        0.080
Grosse Tete (22-047-0007).........        0.086        0.084        0.071        0.070        0.080        0.075
Port Allen (22-121-0001)..........        0.087        0.076        0.072        0.072        0.078        0.073
Pride (22-033-0013)...............        0.082        0.077        0.074        0.072        0.077        0.074
French Settlement (22-063-0002)...        0.079        0.084        0.075        0.075        0.079        0.078
Capitol (22-033-0009).............        0.084        0.074        0.067        0.076        0.075        0.072
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Unlike for the 1-hour ozone standard, design value calculations for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard are based
  on a rolling three-year average of the annual 4th highest values (40 CFR part 50, Appendix I).

    EPA's review of these data shows that the Baton Rouge ozone
nonattainment area has met and continues to meet the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Data for 2007-2009, show the area continues to attain the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. Preliminary data available to date for the 2010
ozone season are consistent with continued attainment. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this notice or on
other relevant matters pertaining to this rulemaking action. These
comments will be considered before EPA takes final action. Interested
parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure by
submitting written comments to the EPA Region 6 Office listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this Federal Register.

V. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Baton Rouge 1997 8-hour
ozone moderate nonattainment area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, based on complete, quality assured data through 2008, and
data for

2007-2009 indicating continued attainment. Preliminary data for the
2010 ozone season available to date are consistent with continued
attainment. As provided in 40 CFR 51.918, if EPA finalizes this
determination, it would suspend the requirements for the Baton Rouge
area to submit planning SIPs related to attainment of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for this area, for so long as the area continues to attain
the standard.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action proposes to make a determination of attainment based on
air quality, and would, if finalized, result in the suspension of
certain Federal requirements, and would not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to the requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: June 14, 2010.
Lawrence E. Starfield,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2010-15471 Filed 6-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P