Sustainability Report 2010/11
Improving Fuel Economy
   * EcoBoost(TM)
   * Advanced Transmissions
   * Electric Power-Assisted Steering
   * Automatic Start/Stop
   * Weight Reductions
   * BMS
   * Aggressive Deceleration Fuel Shut-Off
   * Aerodynamics
   * Smaller Vehicles
This section outlines our plans for improving the fuel economy of traditional gas and diesel engines. These actions include implementing advanced engine and transmission technologies, weight reductions and aerodynamic improvements, as well as increasing the efficiency of vehicle sub-systems.
For more information about each of our fuel efficiency technologies please click on the icons in the graphic above.
EcoBoost(TM)
indicates stage completed
                                     2007
                                   Near Term
                    Begin migration to advanced technology
                                     2011
                                   Mid Term
                    Full implementation of known technology
                                  2020 - 2030
                                   Long term
Continue leverage of hybrid technologies and deployment of alternative energy sources
Significant number of vehicles with EcoBoost engines
EcoBoost engines available in nearly all vehicle nameplates
Increase percentage of internal-combustion engines dependent on renewable fuels
The centerpiece of our near-term fuel-economy improvement efforts is the EcoBoost engine, which uses turbocharging and direct injection along with reduced displacement to deliver significant fuel-efficiency gains without sacrificing engine power or vehicle performance. EcoBoost engines help to improve vehicle fuel economy 10 to 20 percent and reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions up to 15 percent compared to larger-displacement engines.
EcoBoost offers better value than many other advanced fuel-efficiency technologies. Due to its affordability relative to competing powertrain options, and its compatibility with most of the gas-powered vehicles we produce, we are able to migrate EcoBoost's fuel-economy benefits throughout our product lineup more quickly and to a greater number of our customers. Our rapid deployment of EcoBoost in high volumes across a wide array of our vehicle nameplates is also helping us make a dramatic step forward in CO2 emission reductions.
EcoBoost was first introduced in North America as a 3.5L V6 engine on the 2010 Lincoln MKS, Lincoln MKT, Ford Taurus SHO and Ford Flex. This engine provides similar performance to a normally aspirated V8 engine, but with the fuel economy of a V6. Thanks largely to EcoBoost technology, the V6 Ford Taurus SHO and Lincoln MKT deliver unsurpassed fuel economy in their respective segments.
EcoBoost has thus far proven to be a great success. For example, EcoBoost is influencing many consumers to consider and buy Ford vehicles who were not previously Ford customers. In other words, it is increasing Ford's "conquest rate"  -  i.e., the number of customers who are switching from other manufacturers to buy Ford vehicles. The Taurus SHO with EcoBoost now has the highest conquest rate in its segment, and the Flex EcoBoost has a more than 65 percent conquest rate after two years on sale. EcoBoost is proving especially attractive to 35- to 55-year-old males, an important demographic that has been less likely to purchase Ford vehicles in the past.
In addition to these commercial successes, the EcoBoost engine has received multiple awards, including the "Breakthrough" award from Popular Mechanics and a "10 Best Engines" award from Ward's.
We continue to expand the application of EcoBoost technology to more engine types and vehicles. In 2010 and 2011, for example:
   * We introduced the 3.5L V6 EcoBoost on the Ford F-150. The F-150 with EcoBoost is the most fuel-efficient pickup truck in its class, with a rating from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency of 16 mpg city and 22 mpg highway.1 The new F-150 also has best-in-class torque, payload and towing capacity.
   * We also introduced a 2.0L EcoBoost engine, which is the first in the EcoBoost lineup to go truly global.
         o In the U.S., we will be introducing the 2.0L I-4 EcoBoost on the 2012 Ford Edge and the all-new 2012 Ford Explorer and 2012 Ford Focus. These are the first four-cylinder EcoBoost engines available in the U.S. The Edge and Explorer with the 2.0L I-4 EcoBoost are expected to deliver best-in-class fuel economy, with the performance feel of a traditional V6. The Explorer will feature fuel economy at least 20 percent better than the current model. We are also introducing the first high-performance vehicle with an EcoBoost engine  -  the Ford Focus ST, a special high-performance version of the Focus.
         o In Europe, we introduced the Ford S-MAX and Galaxy with a 2.0L EcoBoost option.
         o In China, we launched the 2.0L EcoBoost engine on the Ford Mondeo.
         o In 2011, we will introduce the 2.0L EcoBoost on the Mondeo followed by the Falcon in 2012 in Australia.
   * We debuted a 1.6L I-4 EcoBoost on the 2011 Ford C-MAX in Europe. This engine is also now available in the all-new Ford Focus European version, and we plan to offer it in the 2013 Ford C-MAX, which will be available in the U.S.
   * We revealed a 1.0L three-cylinder EcoBoost engine at the Paris Auto Show in 2010. This engine delivers the power of a 1.6L I-4 with better fuel economy. We plan to introduce it for use in Europe and other global markets.
These EcoBoost engines illustrate Ford's plans to use smaller-displacement, power-boosted engines to deliver improved fuel economy and performance throughout our vehicle lineup.
By 2013, Ford plans to offer EcoBoost engines on 85 to 90 percent of our North American and European nameplates and continue to migrate them to our other regions.
   1. The F-150's fuel efficiency is compared to other high-volume pickup trucks, not including low-volume special fuel-economy models.
Advanced Transmissions
indicates stage completed
                                     2007
                                   Near Term
                    Begin migration to advanced technology
                                     2011
                                   Mid Term
                    Full implementation of known technology
                                  2020 - 2030
                                   Long term
Continue leverage of hybrid technologies and deployment of alternative energy sources
Dual-clutch and six-speed transmissions begin replacing four- and five-speeds
Full implementation of six-speed transmissions

To further improve the fuel economy of our vehicles, we are implementing a dual-clutch transmission system called PowerShift. PowerShift combines manual and automatic transmission technologies to deliver the fuel efficiency of a manual with the driving ease of an automatic. It uses six speeds instead of the four or five on most automatics, which further increases fuel efficiency. PowerShift technology increases fuel efficiency by up to 9 percent compared to traditional four-speed automatic transmissions, depending on the application.
A "wet clutch" version of this technology has already been implemented in Europe on the Ford Focus, C-MAX, Kuga, S-MAX, Galaxy and Mondeo, in combination with a 2.0L Duratorq(R) TDCi diesel. The wet clutch version is also the standard transmission for the new 2.0L EcoBoost(TM) engine on the Ford Mondeo, S-MAX and Galaxy.
A "dry clutch" version was introduced in North America in April 2010 on the all-new Ford Fiesta and subsequently on the new Ford Focus in November 2010. The dry clutch version gets even better gas mileage. Unlike wet clutch systems, the dry PowerShift transmission does not use an oil pump, making the system more efficient with the same weight as a traditional four-speed automatic transmission.
We are also introducing conventional six-speed transmissions to replace less-efficient four- and five-speed transmissions in a range of vehicles, including the new Super Duty(R) with 6.2L and 6.7L engines and all of the Ford Mustang, F-150 and new Explorer powertrain options. Six-speed transmissions improve fuel economy by up to 5 percent compared to typical four- and five-speed gearboxes; they also provide better acceleration, smoother shifting and a quieter driving experience. By the end of 2012, 98 percent of Ford's North American transmissions will be advanced six-speed gearboxes. And by 2013, we plan to offer advanced six-speed transmissions  -  both PowerShift and conventional six-speed technology  -  on 100 percent of our new, non-hybrid vehicles in Europe and North America and many new vehicles in other regions.
In the near term we are improving the performance of our PowerShift and conventional transmissions by further optimizing their operation with EcoBoost engines and reducing parasitic losses, such as mechanical friction and unnecessary hydraulic and fluid pumping, to achieve higher operating efficiency. In the longer term we will be researching advanced transmission concepts to support further engine downsizing and electrification.
Electric Power-Assisted Steering (EPAS)
indicates stage completed
                                     2007
                                   Near Term
                    Begin migration to advanced technology
                                     2011
                                   Mid Term
                    Full implementation of known technology
                                  2020 - 2030
                                   Long term
Continue leverage of hybrid technologies and deployment of alternative energy sources
Electric power steering
Full implementation of electric power steering

We are phasing in electric power-assisted steering technology, which typically will reduce fuel consumption and decrease carbon dioxide emissions by up to 3.5 percent over traditional hydraulic systems, depending on the vehicle and powertrain application. On the 1.4L Duratorq(R) diesel Ford Fiesta, for example, which is available in Europe, EPAS provides a 3 - 4 percent improvement in fuel efficiency compared with a hydraulic-based power steering system. By combining EPAS with aerodynamic improvements, we improved the mileage of this vehicle by approximately 8 percent compared to the previous model year. In addition, EPAS supports other fuel-saving activities we plan to introduce. For example, "automatic start/stop" technology can be introduced without degrading steering assist to the driver. (For details on this technology, see Automatic Start/Stop.)
In 2010 and 2011, we added EPAS to the all-new Ford Explorer, Ford F-150, Ford Mustang and Lincoln MKZ hybrid in North America, as well as the new Ford C-MAX and Focus in North America and Europe. This adds to our existing lineup of vehicles with EPAS  -  the Ford Fusion, Flex, Taurus and Escape and the Lincoln MKS and MKT in North America, as well as the Ford Fiesta and Ka in Europe. Ultimately, we will introduce EPAS into all of our passenger cars and light-duty vehicles.
Automatic Start/Stop
indicates stage completed
                                     2007
                                   Near Term
                    Begin migration to advanced technology
                                     2011
                                   Mid Term
                    Full implementation of known technology
                                  2020 - 2030
                                   Long term
Continue leverage of hybrid technologies and deployment of alternative energy sources
Start/stop systems (micro hybrids)
Increased application of start/stop systems

We have developed a "start/stop" technology that shuts down the engine when the vehicle is stopped and automatically restarts it before the accelerator pedal is pressed to resume driving. This technology maintains the same vehicle functionality as a vehicle without the technology, but it improves city driving fuel economy by up to 6 percent. The gain can be as high as 10 percent for some drivers, depending on vehicle size and usage. The technology can also reduce tailpipe emissions to zero while the vehicle is stationary, for example when waiting at a stoplight.
Start/stop technology includes sensors to monitor functions such as cabin temperature, power supply state and steering input, so that vehicle functioning remains exactly the same to the driver as when the engine remains on continuously. If the system senses that a vehicle function has been reduced and will negatively impact the driver's experience, the engine will restart automatically.
Start/stop technology is already being used in our hybrid vehicles and will eventually provide a cost-effective way to improve fuel efficiency on a large volume of non-hybrid vehicles. In the U.S., we are planning to introduce the technology into non-hybrid vehicles in 2012. When it debuts in the U.S. it will be available on automatic transmission vehicles, including those with fuel-efficient six-speed automatic transmissions. In Europe, automatic start/stop is already standard on the Ford Ka and certain versions of the Mondeo, S-MAX and Galaxy. It is launching in 2011 on the Ford Focus, C-MAX and Grand C-MAX. By 2016, 90 percent of our vehicle nameplates globally will be available with start/stop technology.

Weight Reductions
indicates stage completed
                                     2007
                                   Near Term
                    Begin migration to advanced technology
                                     2011
                                   Mid Term
                    Full implementation of known technology
                                  2020 - 2030
                                   Long term
Continue leverage of hybrid technologies and deployment of alternative energy sources
Increased unibody applications
Weight reductions of 250 - 750 lbs
Continue weight reductions using advanced materials
We are also working to improve fuel economy by decreasing the weight of our vehicles  -  in particular by increasing our use of unibody vehicle designs, lighter-weight components and lighter-weight materials.
Unibody vehicle designs reduce weight by eliminating the need for the body-on-frame design used in truck-based products. Unibody-based crossover vehicles provide many of the benefits of truck-based SUVs, such as roominess, all-wheel drive and higher stance, with significantly reduced total vehicle weight. The all-new 2011 Ford Explorer uses a lightweight unibody design, as do the current Ford Edge and Lincoln MKX crossovers.
EcoBoost(TM) engine technology allows us to use a smaller, lighter-weight engine system while delivering more power and better fuel economy. Similarly, the dual-clutch PowerShift system weighs up to 30 pounds less than the four-speed automatic transmission it is replacing.
The lighter-weight materials we are using include advanced high-strength steel, aluminum, magnesium, natural fibers and nano-based materials. These "lightweighting" efforts can reduce the weight of our vehicles by 250 to 750 pounds, without compromising vehicle size, safety, performance or customer-desired features. The following are examples of our use of lighter-weight materials:
   * The 2010 Lincoln MKT crossover has an advanced lightweight magnesium and aluminum liftgate.
   * We use an aluminum hood on the Ford F-150 and high-strength, lighter-weight steels in more than 50 percent of the F-150 cab.
   * The 2011 Ford Explorer makes extensive use of high-strength steels. Nearly half of the vehicle's structure  -  including the A-pillars, rocker panels and front beams  -  are comprised of high-strength steels, such as boron.
   * In the 2012 Ford Focus, more than 55 percent of the vehicle shell is made from high-strength steel and more than 26 percent of the vehicle's structure is formed from ultra-high-strength boron steels. The Focus combines these high-strength steels with innovative manufacturing methods to further reduce weight. For example, the vehicle's B-pillar reinforcement, a key structural part, is made from ultra-high-strength boron steel that has been produced using an innovative tailor-rolling process. The process allows the thickness of the steel sheet to be varied along its length, so the component has increased strength in the areas that are subjected to the greatest loads. The tailor-rolled B-pillar has eight different gauge thicknesses, to improve side-impact crash performance while saving more than three pounds per vehicle.
   * We are also expanding our use of aluminum engine parts and all-aluminum engines. The 2011 Mustang, for example, has an aluminum engine. Combined with other fuel-efficiency improvements, this lighter-weight engine delivers class-leading fuel economy at 19 mpg city/30 mpg highway with a six-speed automatic transmission  -  a 25 percent improvement over the 2010 model.
Please see the Environment section for further information on materials-based weight reductions.
Battery Management Systems (BMS)
indicates stage completed
                                     2007
                                   Near Term
                    Begin migration to advanced technology
                                     2011
                                   Mid Term
                    Full implementation of known technology
                                  2020 - 2030
                                   Long term
Continue leverage of hybrid technologies and deployment of alternative energy sources
Introduction of battery management systems

Electrical systems are another area in which we are making progress. By reducing vehicle electrical loads and increasing the efficiency of the vehicle's electrical power generation systems, we can improve fuel efficiency. Our battery management systems, for example, control the power supply system (in particular the alternator) to maximize the overall efficiency of the electrical system and reduce its negative impacts on fuel economy. This is accomplished by maximizing electricity generation during the most fuel-efficient situations, such as vehicle deceleration. In less fuel-efficient situations, the alternator's electricity generation is minimized to conserve fuel. BMS has already been launched in Europe on the Ford Focus and Mondeo and in the U.S. beginning with the 2011 Ford Edge, Explorer and F-150, the 2011 Lincoln MKX, and the 2012 Ford Focus. We have also introduced more-efficient alternators, which improve fuel economy.

Agressive Deceleration Fuel Shut-Off
indicates stage completed
                                     2007
                                   Near Term
                    Begin migration to advanced technology
                                     2011
                                   Mid Term
                    Full implementation of known technology
                                  2020 - 2030
                                   Long term
Continue leverage of hybrid technologies and deployment of alternative energy sources
Begin implementing ADFSO
ADFSO at high volume

We are deploying Aggressive Deceleration Fuel Shut-Off technology to improve fuel efficiency. ADFSO allows fuel supply to the engine to be shut off during vehicle deceleration and then automatically restarted when needed for acceleration or when the vehicle's speed approaches zero. This new system builds on the Deceleration Fuel Shut-Off technology available in our existing vehicles by extending the fuel shut-off feature to lower speeds and more types of common driving conditions, without compromising driving performance or non-carbon dioxide emission reductions.
This improved fuel shut-off will increase fuel economy by an average of 1 percent. An additional benefit of the ADFSO technology is increased deceleration rates, which should extend brake life and improve speed control on undulating roads.
Starting in 2008 this technology was implemented on the Ford Flex, F-150, Expedition and Escape and the Lincoln MKS and Navigator. We are continuing to implement it as we bring out new vehicles. For example, the 2011 Ford Edge, Ford Explorer and Lincoln MKX use ADFSO. The ADFSO technology will be a standard feature in all of our North American vehicles by 2015, and we will continue to expand implementation globally.
Aerodynamics
indicates stage completed
                                     2007
                                   Near Term
                    Begin migration to advanced technology
                                     2011
                                   Mid Term
                    Full implementation of known technology
                                  2020 - 2030
                                   Long term
Continue leverage of hybrid technologies and deployment of alternative energy sources
Aerodynamic improvements
Additional aerodynamic improvements

We are optimizing vehicle aerodynamics to improve the fuel economy of our global product lineup. Using a systems engineering approach that integrates aerodynamics in an interdisciplinary and collaborative design and development processes with other fuel-economy technologies, we maximize the fuel efficiency of every vehicle we develop. During the development process, we use advanced computer simulations and optimization methods coupled with wind-tunnel testing to create vehicle designs that deliver up to 5 percent better fuel economy. In addition, we are developing simulation systems that allow us to replicate on-the-road driving conditions during the virtual design phase, to further improve the real-world benefits of aerodynamic improvements.
Using these approaches, we made significant improvements in aerodynamics in 2010. For example:
   * In North America, we improved the fuel efficiency of Ford's midsize family sedans, including the 2010 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ, by reducing aerodynamic drag by 5 percent. We accomplished this by further streamlining the exterior design and lowering the vehicles' ride height. These aerodynamic improvements were a key enabler for the Ford Fusion Hybrid's 41 mpg rating, which makes it the most fuel-efficient midsize sedan available in North America.1
   * We have also reduced the aerodynamic drag of the 2010 Mustang by 4 percent for the V6 model and 7 percent for the V8 model. These aerodynamic improvements resulted in a 0.5 mpg and 1 mpg improvement in fuel economy at 70 mph cruising speeds, for the V6 and V8 models respectively.
   * We improved the fuel economy of the 2011 Ford Edge and Lincoln MKX compared to the 2010 models in part through aerodynamic improvements, including underbody shielding, tire spoilers and optimized grille openings that reduce excess airflow to the engine compartment, thus reducing drag. The 2011 Edge and MKX have best-in-class fuel economy in their segments.
   * In the 2011 Ford Explorer, we improved fuel economy by almost 1 mpg at highway speeds by coordinating the design of the front-mounted air dam and the rear roof-mounted spoiler.
For 2011, we are continuing to build on these improvements. For example, aerodynamic improvements helped the 2011 Ford Fiesta SFE achieve a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-rated 40 mpg. Also in 2011, we introduced an "active grille shutter" technology that reduces aerodynamic drag by up to 6 percent, thereby increasing fuel economy and reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. When fully closed, the reduction in drag means that the active grille shutter can reduce CO2 emissions by 2 percent. This technology was implemented first on our European vehicles; in the U.S. the 2012 Ford Focus is the first vehicle to use it. Through that technology and other design improvements, we have significantly reduced the drag coefficient on the all-new 2012 Focus four-door to 0.297 from the current model's 0.320. Optimized aerodynamics also helps reduce wind noise in the Focus.
   1. Midsize sedan segment based on the R.L. Polk segment definition.

Smaller Vehicles
indicates stage completed
                                     2007
                                   Near Term
                    Begin migration to advanced technology
                                     2011
                                   Mid Term
                    Full implementation of known technology
                                  2020 - 2030
                                   Long term
Continue leverage of hybrid technologies and deployment of alternative energy sources
Introduction of additional small vehicles
Engine displacement reductions facilitated by weight savings

Smaller vehicles provide consumers with another way to get better fuel economy. We are launching more small cars to provide more fuel-efficient options. For example:
   * We are introducing subcompact vehicles commonly referred to as "B-cars." These include the all-new Ford Fiesta, which was introduced in Europe in 2008, the Asia Pacific region in 2009 and the Americas in 2010.
   * We are introducing a wide range of new vehicles in the U.S. and other markets based on our global "C-platform," or compact sedan. At the 2011 North American Auto Show we showcased 10 new vehicles based on this C-platform, most of which will be available in the U.S. in the next few years. In 2011 we are introducing the next-generation global Ford Focus to North America. This vehicle includes the first in a series of powertrain technology developments that will give our C-car segment offerings a combination of power, performance and unsurpassed fuel economy. For example, the Focus will be equipped with a responsive, fuel-efficient, 2.0L I-4 engine with twin independent variable camshaft timing and direct injection, plus a dual-clutch PowerShift transmission. We will also offer a battery electric version called the Focus Electric. In addition, we are introducing the Ford C-MAX in the U.S., a multi-activity vehicle based on our C-platform. This vehicle will also ultimately include a hybrid and plug-in hybrid version.
   * We brought the European Transit Connect small commercial van to North America. This vehicle fills an unmet need in the U.S. market by offering the large cargo space that small business owners need in a fuel-efficient, maneuverable, durable and flexible vehicle package.
We also loaded these smaller vehicles with features and options commonly found on larger or luxury vehicles to make them attractive, thus encouraging customers to choose more fuel-efficient cars and trucks.
All of these smaller vehicles illustrate Ford's actions to provide consumers with a wider range of fuel-efficient options, as well as our efforts to leverage the best of our global products to offer new choices to customers in all of our regions worldwide.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 167 (Monday, August 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59219-59220]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20593]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0681; FRL-9950-67-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incineration Units (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``NSPS for Commercial and
Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units (40 CFR part 60, subpart
CCCC) (Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 1926.07, OMB Control No 2060-0450), to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved
through August 31, 2016. Public comments were requested previously via
the Federal Register (80 FR 32116) on June 5, 2015, during a 60-day
comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public
comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its
estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may neither conduct
nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection
of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before September 28,
2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2012-0681, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information for which disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: Owners and operators of affected facilities are required
to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements for the
General Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A), as well as for the
specific requirements at 40 CFR part 60, subparts CCCC. This includes
submitting initial notification reports, performance tests and periodic
reports and results, and maintaining records of the occurrence and
duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of
an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system
is inoperative. These reports are used by EPA to determine compliance
with these standards.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Commercial and industrial solid
waste incineration units.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart CCCC).
    Estimated number of respondents: 30 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, semiannually and
annually.
    Total estimated burden: 6,520 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $1,080,000 (per year), which includes
$406,000 in either annualized capital/startup or operation &
maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the
total estimated burden hours and cost as

currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. This
increase is not due to any program changes. The change in the burden
and cost estimates occurred because of a change in assumption. This ICR
assumes all existing respondents will have to re-familiarize themselves
with the regulatory requirements each year.
    There is an adjustment increase in the total estimated capital and
O&M costs as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved
Burdens. This increase is not due to any program changes. The change in
capital and O&M costs occurred because this ICR uses updated labor
rates for contractor labor related to capital and O&M costs.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2016-20593 Filed 8-26-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Record for the Proposed Section 316( b) Rule for Phase III Facilities 1 2 3 4 5 6 A B C D E Date Modified: 5/ 25/ 2006 By: Abt Associates Inc.

Data Sources: http:// www. bea. doc. gov/ bea/ dn/ nipaweb/ TableView. asp# Mid Description: Compiles Implicit Price Deflators for Gross Domestic Product ( GDP)

Purpose: For converting values into constant dollars November 1, 2004 1 of 4 DCTM_ ARP. xls  File Info Title: Gross Domestic Product: Implicit Price Deflator Series ID: GDPDEF Source: U. S. Department of Commerce: Bureau of Economic Analysis Release: Gross Domestic Product Seasonal Adjustment: Seasonally Adjusted Frequency: Quarterly Units: Index 2000= 100 Date Range: 1947 01 01 to 2005 10 01 Last Updated: 2006 01 27 10: 05 AM CT Notes: The number of decimal places reported varies over time. A Guide t the National Income and Product Accounts of the United States ( NIP  ( http:// www. bea. doc. gov/ bea/ an/ nipaguid. pdf) Downloaded: 2/ 3/ 2006 from http:// research. stlouisfed. org/ fred2/ series/ GDPDEF/ 18 Earlier years' values have been deleted Year DATE VALUE Average of VALUE 1987 1987 01 01 72.487 Year Total 1987 1987 04 01 72.882 1987 73.188 1987 1987 07 01 73.425 1988 75.685 1987 1987 10 01 73.958 1989 78.552 1988 1988 01 01 74.587 1990 81.591 1988 1988 04 01 75.300 1991 84.440 1988 1988 07 01 76.141 1992 86.380 1988 1988 10 01 76.712 1993 88.376 1989 1989 01 01 77.580 1994 90.254 1989 1989 04 01 78.324 1995 92.103 1989 1989 07 01 78.879 1996 93.847 1989 1989 10 01 79.425 1997 95.410 1990 1990 01 01 80.375 1998 96.468 1990 1990 04 01 81.311 1999 97.862 1990 1990 07 01 82.031 2000 99.997 1990 1990 10 01 82.646 2001 102.399 1991 1991 01 01 83.626 2002 104.185 1991 1991 04 01 84.165 2003 106.298 1991 1991 07 01 84.762 2004 109.091 1991 1991 10 01 85.206 2005 112.106 1992 1992 01 01 85.721 1992 1992 04 01 86.190 1992 1992 07 01 86.580 1992 1992 10 01 87.029 1993 1993 01 01 87.707 1993 1993 04 01 88.190 1993 1993 07 01 88.570 1993 1993 10 01 89.038 1994 1994 01 01 89.578 1994 1994 04 01 89.954 1994 1994 07 01 90.530 1994 1994 10 01 90.952 1995 1995 01 01 91.530 1995 1995 04 01 91.859 1995 1995 07 01 92.289 1995 1995 10 01 92.733 1996 1996 01 01 93.328 1996 1996 04 01 93.659 1996 1996 07 01 93.951 1996 1996 10 01 94.450 1997 1997 01 01 95.054 1997 1997 04 01 95.206 1997 1997 07 01 95.534 1997 1997 10 01 95.846 1998 1998 01 01 96.089 1998 1998 04 01 96.249 1998 1998 07 01 96.600 1998 1998 10 01 96.934 1999 1999 01 01 97.328 1999 1999 04 01 97.674 1999 1999 07 01 98.013 1999 1999 10 01 98.432 2000 2000 01 01 99.317 2000 2000 04 01 99.745 2000 2000 07 01 100.259 2000 2000 10 01 100.666 2001 2001 01 01 101.478 2001 2001 04 01 102.252 2001 2001 07 01 102.675 2001 2001 10 01 103.191 2002 2002 01 01 103.568 2002 2002 04 01 103.938 2002 2002 07 01 104.328 2002 2002 10 01 104.907 2003 2003 01 01 105.705 2003 2003 04 01 106.004 2003 2003 07 01 106.498 2003 2003 10 01 106.983 2004 2004 01 01 107.958 2004 2004 04 01 108.987 2004 2004 07 01 109.343 2004 2004 10 01 110.077 2005 2005 01 01 110.905 2005 2005 04 01 111.622 2005 2005 07 01 112.527 2005 2005 10 01 113.369 e to NIPA)


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 31 (Thursday, February 18, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 10123]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03296]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4502-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

District of Columbia; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major
Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the District of Columbia (FEMA-4502-DR), dated March 29, 2020, and
related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on January 20, 2021.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Janice P.
Barlow, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer
for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of MaryAnn Tierney as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

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

Robert J. Fenton,
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-03296 Filed 2-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 23, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63298-63301]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24764]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0187]

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 16 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 CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 22, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0187 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket numbers for this notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on January
17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may 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 16 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.

Qualifications of Applicants

Richard J. Batzel

    Mr. Batzel, 64, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. Batzel understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Batzel meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2013 and certified that he has stable
non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Minnesota.

Peter J. Benz

    Mr. Benz, 56, has had ITDM since 1973. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2013 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. Benz understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Benz meets the vision requirements
of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2013 and
certified that he has stable, non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy.

He holds a Class E operator's license from Florida.

Michael L. Collins

    Mr. Collins, 57, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. Collins understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Collins meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2013 and certified that he has stable
non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Washington.

Steven M. Dent

    Mr. Dent, 62, has had ITDM since 2011. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2013 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. Dent understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely.
    Mr. Dent meets the vision requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Iowa.

Leburn L. Gardner

    Mr. Gardner, 68, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. Gardner understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gardner meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Missouri.

Isadore Johnson, Jr.

    Mr. Johnson, 71, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Johnson understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Johnson meets the
vision requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic
retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.

Brian K. Lester

    Mr. Lester, 59, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. Lester understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Lester meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in
2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds
a Class A CDL from Montana.

Richard E. Li

    Mr. Li, 51, has had ITDM since 2011. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2013 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. Li understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Li meets the requirements of the
vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him
in 2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds a Class D operator's license from Massachusetts.

Brent L. McDaniels

    Mr. McDaniels, 42, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. McDaniels understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. McDaniels meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2013 and certified that he has stable
non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class O operator's
license from Michigan.

Travis F. Moon

    Mr. Moon, 42, has had ITDM since 1987. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2013 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. Moon understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Moon meets the vision requirements
of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2013 and
certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class
A CDL from Georgia.

Steven D. Nowakowski

    Mr. Nowakowski, 51, has had ITDM since 2011. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. Nowakowski understands

diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes
using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Nowakowski meets
the vision requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic
retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from Maryland.

Stephen Plesz

    Mr. Plesz, 60, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. Plesz understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Plesz meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him
in 2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds a Class A CDL from Connecticut.

Stanley A. Sabin

    Mr. Sabin, 62, has had ITDM since 1980. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. Sabin understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sabin meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him
in 2013 and certified that he has stable, non-proliferative diabetic
retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Kentucky.

Stephen A. Stewart

    Mr. Stewart, 56, has had ITDM since 1998. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. Stewart understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Stewart meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class E operator's license from
Missiouri.

Thomas L. Stoudnour

    Mr. Stoudnour, 60, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. Stoudnour understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Stoudnour meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Merle L. Weyer

    Mr. Weyer, 39, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 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. Weyer understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Weyer meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in
2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds
a Class A CDL from South Dakota.

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 USC. 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.

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-2013-0187 and click the search button. When the new screen
appears, click on the blue ``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand
side of the page. On the new page, enter information required including
the specific section of this document to which each comment applies,
and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. If you
submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of
the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number
FMCSA-2013-0187 and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket
Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments related to the
proposed rulemaking.

    Issued on: October 7, 2013.
 Larry W. Minor,
 Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-24764 Filed 10-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 34 (Friday, February 20, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9207-9209]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03287]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R07-OAR-2014-0900; FRL-9923-14-Region 7]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Attainment
Redesignation for Missouri Portion of the St. Louis MO-IL Area; 1997 8-
Hour Ozone Standard and Associated Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve the State of Missouri's request to redesignate the
Missouri portion of the St. Louis MO-IL nonattainment area, the ``St.
Louis area'' or ``area'' to attainment for the 1997 8-hour National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or Standard) for ozone
(O3). The Missouri counties comprising the St. Louis area
are Franklin, Jefferson, St. Charles, and St. Louis along with the City
of St. Louis. EPA's approval of the redesignation request is based on
the determination that the St. Louis area has met the criteria for
redesignation to attainment set forth in the Clean Air Act (CAA),
including the determination that the St. Louis area has attained the
1997 8-hour O3 standard. Additionally, EPA is approving the
state's plan for maintaining the 1997 O3 standard in the St.
Louis area for 10 years beyond redesignation. In a separate action the
state of Illinois submitted a similar redesignation request for the
Illinois portion of the St. Louis MO-IL 1997 8-hour O3 area.
On June 12, 2012, the EPA published a document in the Federal Register
taking final action to address the Illinois portion of the St. Louis
area.

DATES: Effective date: This final rule is effective on February 20,
2015.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R07-OAR-2014-0900. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas 66219. The Regional Office's official hours of business
are Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal
holidays. 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: Ms. Lachala Kemp, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, KS 66219 at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we refer to EPA. This section provides
additional information by addressing the following:

Table of Contents

I. What is the background for this rule?
II. Summary of SIP Revisions
III. What action is EPA taking??
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for this rule?

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour O3
NAAQS of 0.08 parts per million (ppm) (62 FR 38856). EPA published a
final rule designating and classifying areas under the 8-hour
O3 NAAQS on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857). In that
rulemaking, the St. Louis area was designated as nonattainment for the
1997 8-hour O3 standard and classified as a moderate
nonattainment area under subpart 2 of the CAA.
    On November 3, 2011, Missouri requested redesignation of the
Missouri portion of the St. Louis area to attainment of the 1997 8-hour
O3 standard, and requested approval of the Missouri SIP
revision containing a maintenance plan for the Missouri portion of the
St. Louis area. Missouri submitted a supplement to this request on
April 29, 2014.
    On June 9, 2011 (76 FR 33647), EPA issued a final rulemaking
determining that the entire St. Louis MO-IL area attained the 1997 8-
hour O3 NAAQS based on three years of complete, quality
assured O3 data for the period of 2008-2010.
    On December 31, 2014(79 FR 78755), EPA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPR) proposing to approve Missouri's request to
redesignate the Missouri portion of the St. Louis area to attainment of
the 1997 8-hour O3 standard, and also proposing to approve
Missouri's maintenance plan for the area. The proposed rulemaking
provides a detailed discussion and sets forth the basis for determining
that Missouri's redesignation request meets the CAA requirements for
redesignation to attainment for the 1997 8-hour O3 NAAQS.
    The primary background for this action is contained in EPA's
December 31, 2014, proposal to approve Missouri's redesignation
request, and in EPA's June 9, 2011, final rulemaking determining that
the area has attained the 1997 8-hour O3 standard based on
complete, quality assured monitoring data for 2008-2010. In these
rulemakings, we noted that under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50.10 and 40
CFR part 50, appendix I provides that the 8-hour O3 standard
is attained when the three-year average of the annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average O3 concentration is less than
or equal to 0.08 ppm, when rounded at all monitoring sites in the area.
See 69 FR 23857 (April 30, 2004). To support the redesignation of the
area to attainment of the NAAQS, the O3 data must be
complete for the three attainment years. The data completeness
requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient
monitoring data is

greater than ninety percent, and no single year has less than seventy
five percent data completeness. See 40 CFR part 50, appendix I, 2.3(d).
Under the CAA, EPA may redesignate a nonattainment area to attainment
if sufficient, complete, quality assured data are available to
determine that the area has attained the standard and if it meets the
other CAA redesignation requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E).

II. Summary of SIP Revisions

    On November 3, 2011, EPA received a SIP revision from the State of
Missouri requesting redesignation of the Missouri portion of the St.
Louis MO-IL area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour O3
standard, and approval of the area's maintenance plan. Missouri
submitted a supplemental revision on April 29, 2014. The maintenance
plan is designed to keep the Missouri portion of the St. Louis area in
attainment of the 1997 8-hour O3 standard through 2025. A
more detailed rationale for EPA's proposed action to approve the SIP
submissions are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. The
comment period on EPA's proposed rule opened December 31, 2014, the
date of its publication in the Federal Register, and closed on January
30, 2015. No public comments were received on the NPR.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving a request from the State of Missouri to
redesignate the Missouri portion of the St. Louis, MO-IL area to
attainment of the 1997 8-hour O3 standard. In addition, EPA
is approving as a revision to the Missouri SIP, the State's plan for
maintaining the 1997 8-hour O3 standard through 2025 in the
area.
    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), EPA finds there is good cause
for this action to become effective immediately upon publication. This
is because a delayed effective date is unnecessary due to the nature of
a redesignation to attainment, which relieves the area from certain CAA
requirements that would otherwise apply to it. The immediate effective
date for this action is authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which
provides that rulemaking actions may become effective less than 30 days
after publication if the rule ``grants or recognizes an exemption or
relieves a restriction,'' and section 553(d)(3), which allows an
effective date less than 30 days after publication ``as otherwise
provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the
rule.'' The purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in section
553(d) is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their
behavior and prepare before the final rule takes effect. This rule,
however, does not create any new regulatory requirements such that
affected parties would need time to prepare before the rule takes
effect. Rather, this rule relieves the state of various requirements
for this nonattainment area. For these reasons, EPA finds good cause
under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for this action to become effective on the
date of publication of this action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     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 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 CAA; 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

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

    Dated: February 9, 2015.
Karl Brooks,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency amends 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart AA--Missouri

0
2. Section 52.1342 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.1342  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (c) On November 3, 2011 and April 29, 2014, Missouri submitted
requests to redesignate the Missouri portion of the St. Louis MO-IL
area to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The Missouri
portion of the St. Louis MO-IL area includes Jefferson, Franklin, St.
Charles, and St. Louis Counties along with the City of St. Louis. As
part of the redesignation request, the State submitted a plan for
maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone standard through 2025 in the area as
required by Section 175A of the Clean Air Act.

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

0
4. Section 81.326 is amended by revising the entry for ``St. Louis MO-
IL'' in the table entitled ``Missouri--1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS (Primary
and Secondary)'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.326  Missouri.

* * * * *

                                        Missouri--1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and Secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Designation \a\                     Category/Classification
         Designated area         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Date \1\               Type              Date \1\             Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                St. Louis, MO-IL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Franklin County.................  February 20, 2015..  Attainment.........
Jefferson County................  February 20, 2015..  Attainment.........
St. Charles County..............  February 20, 2015..  Attainment.........
St. Louis City..................  February 20, 2015..  Attainment.........
St. Louis County................  February 20, 2015..  Attainment.........

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-03287 Filed 2-19-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 198 (Friday, October 12, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51679-51680]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22014]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9985-24-OW]

Information Sessions in Chicago, Boston and Atlanta;
Implementation of the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
of 2014

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing
plans to hold information sessions on Tuesday, November 13, 2018 in
Chicago, Illinois; Tuesday, December 11, 2018 in Boston, Massachusetts;
and Tuesday, January 15, 2019 in Atlanta, Georgia. The purpose of these
sessions is to provide prospective borrowers with a better
understanding of the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
(WIFIA) program's status, eligibility and statutory requirements,
application process, and financial benefits and flexibilities. The EPA
will also offer 30-minute individual meetings with participants to
learn more about prospective borrower projects and answer specific
questions. Participants will receive a link to sign-up for these
meeting slots after registering for an information session. Additional
information sessions and webinars will be announced.

DATES: The session in Chicago, Illinois will be held on Tuesday,
November 13, 2018 from 9:00 a.m.-2:30 p.m. (CT) at 77 W Jackson Blvd.,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. The session in Boston, Massachusetts will be
held on Tuesday, December 11, 2018 from 9:00 a.m.-2:30 p.m. (ET) at 5
Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, Massachusetts 02109. The session
in Atlanta, Georgia will be held on Tuesday, January 15, 2019 from 9:00
a.m.-2:30 p.m. (ET) at 61 Forsyth St. SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.
    To register: Registration information for the information session
is available at https://www.epa.gov/wifia.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about this
notice, including registration information, contact Arielle Gerstein,
EPA Headquarters, Office of Water, Office of Wastewater Management at
tel.:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email: [email protected]. Members of the public are
invited to participate in the session as capacity allows.
    Authority: Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, Public
Law 113-121.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under WIFIA, the EPA will provide loans and
loan guarantees for water infrastructure of national or regional
significance. WIFIA was signed into law on June 11, 2014 as Public Law
113-121. The EPA will provide an overview of the program's statutory
and eligibility requirements, application and selection process, and
creditworthiness assessment. The EPA will also explain the financial
benefits of WIFIA credit assistance and provide high-level information
about the benefits and flexibilities of closed loans. The intended
audience is prospective borrowers including municipal entities,
corporations, partnerships, and State Revolving Fund programs, as well
as the private and non-governmental organizations that support
prospective borrowers.

    Dated: September 28, 2018.
Andrew D. Sawyers,
Director, Office of Wastewater Management.
[FR Doc. 2018-22014 Filed 10-11-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 28 (Tuesday, February 11, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8184-8185]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02927]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Commissioner and Staff Attendance at the National
Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners 2014 Winter Committee
Meeting

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission)
hereby gives notice that members of the Commission and/or Commission
staff may attend the following meeting:

FERC/National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC),
Sunday Morning Collaborative: ``Resource Adequacy A Problem that Needs
Fixing or a Solution in Search of a Problem?'' February 9, 2014,
Renaissance Washington Hotel, 999 Ninth Street NW., Washington, DC
20001

    Further information may be found at http://winter.narucmeetings.org/program.cfm
    The discussion at this meeting, which is open to the public, may
address matters at issue in the following Commission proceedings:

Docket No. AD14-3-000, Coordination Across the Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc./PJM Interconnection, LLC Seam,
Docket No. ER11-4081, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator,
Inc.
Docket No. ER14-801, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. EL13-76, AmerenEnergy Resources Generating Company v.
Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-1962, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-1963, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-292, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-294, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER12-2302, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator,
Inc.
Docket No. ER13-1695, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-1699, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-1210, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-1212, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-1242, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER14-1243, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
Docket No. AD13-5-000, Flexible and Local Resources Needed for
Reliability in the California Wholesale Electric Market

    Dated: February 4, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-02927 Filed 2-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P