[Federal Register: August 5, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 151)]
[Notices]
[Page 45519-45524]
[DOCID:fr05au08-109]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket ID. FMCSA-2008-0175]

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 47 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 September 4, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-2007-0175 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.
    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 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 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 47
individuals listed in this notice have recently requested exemptions
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 an exemption will achieve the required level of safety
mandated by the statutes.

Qualifications of Applicants

Robert V. Balmes

    Mr. Balmes, age 40, 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. Balmes 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 Commercial Driver's License
(CDL) from Illinois.

David R. Bauerdorf

    Mr. Bauerdorf, 34, has had ITDM since 1993. 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. Bauerdorf 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 New Jersey.

Stephen R. Bortz

    Mr. Bortz, 57, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 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. Bortz meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Florida.

John A. Broeker

    Mr. Broeker, 68, has had ITDM since 1997. 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. Broeker 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 R operator's license from
Colorado, which allows him to operate any motor vehicle with a gross
weight rating of less than 26,001, designed to carry 15 or fewer
passengers, including the driver, and does not carry hazardous
material.

Daniel A. Brown

    Mr. Brown, 32, has had ITDM since 1989. 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. Brown 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
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from Indiana.

Floyd G. Burbach

    Mr. Burbach, 46, 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. Burbach 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.

Kenneth M. Brinker

    Mr. Brinker, 60, 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. Brinker 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.

Richard A. Bruyere

    Mr. Bruyere, 44, 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. Bruyere 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 Wisconsin.

Randie L. Burrows

    Mr. Burrows, 49, has had ITDM since 1997. 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. Burrows 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 New York.

Scott R. Butler

    Mr. Butler, 46, 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. Butler 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 California.

Jay P. Cave

    Mr. Cave, 51, has had ITDM since 2006. 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. Cave 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 B CDL from Illinois.

Jeffrey A. Clark

    Mr. Clark, 30, has had ITDM since 1984. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 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. Clark
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 nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D
operator's license from Massachusetts.

Terry C. Conwell

    Mr. Conwell, 61, 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. Conwell 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.

Steven M. French

    Mr. French, 42, 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. French meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a chauffeur's license from
Michigan.

Glennon E. Goetting

    Mr. Goetting, 69, has had ITDM since 2006. 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. Goetting 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
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from
Illinois.

Philip P. Gray

    Mr. Gray, 43, has had ITDM since 1996. 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. Gray 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 nonproliferative
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Virginia.

John L. Hansen

    Mr. Hansen, 44, has had ITDM since 1966. 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. Hansen 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 Idaho.

Darin D. Harries

    Mr. Harries, 41, has had ITDM since 1969. 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. Harries 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 A CDL from
Minnesota.

William E. Hollowell

    Mr. Hollowell, 28, has had ITDM since 2002. 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. Hollowell 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 an operator's license from Michigan.

Cindy L. Hushin-Brink

    Ms. Hushin-Brink, 52, has had ITDM since 2007. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2008 and certified that she 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 her diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Hushin-Brink meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
ophthalmologist examined her in 2008 and certified that she has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class A CDL from
Pennsylvania.

Steven L. Jensen

    Mr. Jensen, 28, has had ITDM since 1994. 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. Jensen 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 R operator's license from
Colorado, which allows him to operate any motor vehicle with a gross
weight rating of less than 26,001, designed to carry 15 or fewer
passengers, including the driver, and does not carry hazardous
material.

Mark A. Kabriel

    Mr. Kabriel, 38, 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. Kabriel 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
Kansas.

Kevin K. Kimbro

    Mr. Kimbro, 29, has had ITDM since 1983. 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. Kimbro meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Texas.

Richard D. Knoche

    Mr. Knoche, 45, has had ITDM since 2006. 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. Knoche 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 Illinois.

Jonathan D. Koehn

    Mr. Koehn, 26, has had ITDM since 1999. 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. Koehn 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 Nebraska.

Robert J. Lanczkowski

    Mr. Lanczkowski, 52, has had ITDM since 2002. 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. Lanczkowski meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from Maryland.

Terry G. Lindahl

    Mr. Lindahl, 51, has had ITDM since 1982. 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. Lindahl 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 A CDL from
Wisconsin.

Paula S. Lewis

    Ms. Lewis, 53, has had ITDM since 2007. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2008 and certified that she 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 her diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Lewis meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
ophthalmologist examined her in 2008 and certified that she has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from
Vermont.

Edward M. Mason

    Mr. Mason, 45, 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. Mason 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 Kentucky.

John M. McAuliffe

    Mr. McAuliffe, 51, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 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. McAuliffe 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 B CDL from Iowa.

John A. McMurray

    Mr. McMurray, 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. McMurray 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 California.

Kurt V. Miller

    Mr. Miller, 50, has had ITDM since 2006. 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. Miller 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 Illinois.

William W. Moffat

    Mr. Moffat, 40, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 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. Moffat 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
Arizona.

Tyree L. Murdock, II.

    Mr. Murdock, 50, 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. Murdock 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 A CDL from
Florida.

Edward A. Ortega

    Mr. Ortega, 54, 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. Ortega 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.

David W. Payne

    Mr. Payne, 41, has had ITDM since 1974. 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. Payne 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
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Kansas.

Richard Rodriguez

    Mr. Rodriguez, 54, 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. Rodriguez 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 Kansas.

Scott D. Schultz

    Mr. Schultz, 48, 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. Schultz 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
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Minnesota.

Daniel S. Sherman

    Mr. Sherman, 30, has had ITDM since 1991. 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. Sherman 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.

Marvin R. Shipman

    Mr. Shipman, 49, has had ITDM since 1985. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 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. Shipman 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 A CDL from
Georgia.

Mark W. Seem

    Mr. Seem, 57, has had ITDM since 2006. 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. Seem 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 Indiana.

Ricky Sirico

    Mr. Sirico, 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. Sirico 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 C operator's
license from New York.

Daryl L. Vaughn

    Mr. Vaughn, 49, has had ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 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. Vaughn meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's
license from Washington, DC.

Brian K. Wallisch

    Mr. Wallisch, 47, has had ITDM since 1984. 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. Wallisch 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
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's
license from Tennessee.

Steven S. Whitt, Jr.

    Mr. Whitt, 36, has had ITDM since 2000. 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. Whitt 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 F operator's license from
Missouri, which allows him which allows him to operate any motor
vehicle with a gross weight rating of less than 26,001, and does not
carry hazardous material.

Andrew A. Zizza

    Mr. Zizza, 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. Zizza meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Massachusetts.

Mick B. Zoske

    Mr. Zoske, 28, 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. Zoske 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.

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 date indicated in the DATES 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) required 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 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. 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.

    Dated: July 30, 2008.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E8-17859 Filed 8-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: February 20, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 33)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 7786-7789]
[DOCID:fr20fe09-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1360; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-075-AD;
Amendment 39-15791; AD 2009-02-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A.
(CASA), Model C-212-DF Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain CASA Model C-212-DF airplanes. This AD requires a one-time
conductivity inspection to determine the material used in manufacturing
outer to center wing attachment fittings; and one-time inspections to
detect cracks on affected fittings, and corrective action if necessary.
This AD results from reports of cracks found in outer to center wing
attachment fittings. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
cracks on the upper and lower fittings in both outer and center wings,
which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective March 9, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of March 9, 2009.
    We must receive comments on this AD by March 23, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact EADS-CASA,
Military Transport Aircraft Division (MTAD), Integrated Customer
Services (ICS), Technical Services, Avenida de Aragon

404, 28022 Madrid, Spain; telephone +34 91 585 55 84; fax +34 91 585 55
05; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.eads.net.

Examining the AD Docket

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

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, notified us that
an unsafe condition may exist on certain CASA Model C-212-DF airplanes.
The EASA advises that cracks were discovered in outer to center wing
attachment fittings during final assembly of a new production airplane
and in some inspected airplanes already in service. The cracks were
caused by a defective manufacturing process of the outer to center wing
attachment fittings. This condition, if not detected and corrected,
could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    CASA has issued Communication Letter COM 212-303, dated March 16,
2006. This communication letter describes procedures to determine the
material used in the manufacture of outer to center wing attachment
fittings.
    CASA also has issued Communication Letter COM 212-301, Revision 1,
dated March 4, 2006. This communication letter describes procedures for
a high frequency eddy current inspection to detect cracks of the eight
upper and lower fittings in both outer and center wings for both left-
hand and right-hand sides of the airplane.
    In addition, CASA has issued Communication Letter COM 212-302,
Revision 1, dated March 17, 2006. This communication letter describes
procedures for a low frequency eddy current inspection to detect cracks
of the eight upper and lower fittings in both outer and center wings
for both left-hand and right-hand sides of the airplane.
    The EASA mandated the service information and issued emergency
airworthiness directive (AD) 2006-0359-E, dated November 29, 2006
(referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to ensure the continued
airworthiness of these airplanes in the European Union.
    The service bulletins do not specify a method for repairing or
replacing wing attachment fittings. This AD requires replacing cracked
fittings using a method approved by the FAA or EASA (or its delegated
agent). In light of the type of repair that would be required to
address the unsafe condition, and consistent with existing bilateral
airworthiness agreements, we have determined that, for this AD, a
repair approved by the FAA or EASA (or its delegated agent) is
acceptable for compliance with this AD.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.
    Therefore, we are issuing this AD to require determination of the
material used in manufacturing outer to center wing attachment
fittings; and one-time inspections to detect cracks on affected
fittings, and corrective action if necessary. This AD requires
accomplishing the actions specified in the service information
described previously, except as discussed below.

Difference Between This AD and the MCAI

    The compliance time specified in the EASA airworthiness directive
is the effective date of the MCAI. We have determined that a compliance
time of 10 flight hours is appropriate and will provide an acceptable
level of safety.

Costs of Compliance

    None of the airplanes affected by this action are on the U.S.
Register. All airplanes affected by this AD are currently operated by
non-U.S. operators under foreign registry; therefore, they are not
directly affected by this AD action. However, we consider this AD
necessary to ensure that the unsafe condition is addressed if any
affected airplane is imported and placed on the U.S. Register in the
future.
    The following table provides the estimated costs to comply with
this AD for any affected airplane that might be imported and placed on
the U.S. Register in the future.

                                             Table--Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Average labor                                Cost per
               Action                    Work hours     rate per hour          Parts cost            airplane
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection..........................              20              $80   None...................          $1,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    No airplane affected by this AD is currently on the U.S. Register.
Therefore, providing notice and opportunity for public comment is
unnecessary before this AD is issued, and this AD may be made effective
in less than 30 days after it is published in the Federal Register.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments before it becomes effective. However, we invite
you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send
your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include
``Docket No. FAA-2008-1360; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-075-AD'' at
the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory,

economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

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 have 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 the regulation:
    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); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES
section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

2009-02-01 Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A. (CASA): Amendment 39-
15791. Docket No. FAA-2008-1360; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-075-
AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective March 9, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to CASA Model C-212-DF airplanes,
certificated in any category, serial numbers 444 through 477, except
for those airplanes on which CASA Alert All Operator Letter AOL 212-
010, Revision 2, dated March 17, 2005, has been done on both upper
and lower fittings in both outer and center wings for both left-hand
and right-hand sides of the airplane.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of cracks found in outer to
center wing attachment fittings. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct cracks on the upper and lower fittings in both outer and
center wings, which could result in reduced structural integrity of
the airplane.

Compliance

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

Inspection

    (f) Within 10 flight hours after the effective date of this AD,
do a high or low frequency eddy current inspection, as applicable,
to determine the material used in the eight upper and lower fittings
in both outer and center wings for both left-hand and right-hand
sides of the airplane, in accordance with CASA Communication
LetterCOM 212-303, dated March 16, 2006.
    (1) If all fittings are verified to be made of 2024-T42 (L-3140-
T42) alloy, no further action is required by this AD.
    (2) For any fitting verified to be made of 7050-T7451 (L-3767-
T7451) alloy, before further flight, perform high or low frequency
eddy current inspections, as applicable, for cracks on the eight
upper and lower fittings in both outer and center wings for both
left-hand and right-hand sides of the airplane, in accordance with
CASA Communication Letter COM 212-301, Revision 1, dated March 4,
2006; and CASA Communication Letter COM 212-302, Revision 1, dated
March 17, 2006. If any crack is detected, before further flight,
replace the affected fitting using a method approved by the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA;
or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its delegated
agent).

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (g) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Shahram
Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

Related Information

    (h) EASA airworthiness directive 2006-0359-E, dated November 29,
2006, also addresses the subject of this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use the service information contained in Table 1 of
this AD to do the actions required by this AD, as applicable, unless
the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of these documents in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact EADS-
CASA, Military Transport Aircraft Division (MTAD), Integrated
Customer Services (ICS), Technical Services, Avenida de Aragon 404,
28022 Madrid, Spain; telephone +34 91 585 55 84; fax +34 91 585 55
05; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.eads.net.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information that is
incorporated by reference at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221 or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information 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/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html.

                                   Table 1--Material Incorporated by Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Service information                     Revision level                           Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CASA Communication Letter COM 212-301...  1..............................  March 4, 2006.
CASA Communication Letter COM 212-302...  1..............................  March 17, 2006.
CASA Communication Letter COM 212-303...  Original.......................  March 16, 2006.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 28, 2008.
Linda Navarro,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-3261 Filed 2-19-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 184 (Tuesday, September 23, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56836-56838]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22542]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73132; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2014-092]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Fees for Optional Wireless Connectivity for Co-located Clients

September 17, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 4, 2014, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend fees assessed clients for wireless
connectivity that enables clients to receive data from the New York
Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') and NASDAQ. Specifically, NASDAQ proposes to
amend fees assessed for wireless connectivity for co-located clients in
NASDAQ's Carteret data center to receive NYSE, and NYSE ARCA multi-cast
market data feeds. It also proposes to amend fees assessed for remote
multi-cast ITCH (``MITCH'') Wave Ports for clients co-located at other
third-party data centers, through which NASDAQ TotalView ITCH market
data will be distributed after delivery to those data centers via
wireless network. While the proposed changes to the rules pursuant to
this proposal are effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated
that they become operative on October 1, 2014. The text of the proposed
rule change is available at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the
Exchange's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ is proposing to amend fees assessed under NASDAQ Rule 7034
for the delivery of third-party market data to co-located clients in
NASDAQ's Carteret data center clients via a wireless network using
millimeter wave or microwave technology. NASDAQ is also proposing to
amend fees assessed under NASDAQ Rule 7015 for remote Multi-cast ITCH
Wave Ports for clients co-located at other third-party data centers,
through which NASDAQ TotalView ITCH market data will be distributed
after delivery to those data centers via wireless network.
Changes to NYSE Wireless Connectivity
    NASDAQ offers optional wireless connectivity to clients who had
requested such connectivity for other markets' data. NASDAQ uses
network vendors to supply wireless connectivity from the Carteret, NJ
data center to the data centers of other exchanges.\3\ The vendor
installs, tests and maintains the necessary communication equipment for
this wireless network between the data centers. The wireless
connectivity is an optional alternative to fiber optic network
connectivity, providing lower latency because the wireless signals
travel a straight, unimpeded line and because light waves travel faster
through air than through glass (fiber optics). Because wireless
transmission of such data requires an unimpeded line of sight between
Carteret and the data center of the market to which it is connecting,
NASDAQ and its vendors incur costs associated with maintaining hardware
and leasing towers on which its microwave dishes and the associated
hardware are mounted, which generally increase as distance between data
centers increase.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ NASDAQ OMX acts as re-distributor of these third-party
market data feeds, capturing the data at the originating data
centers and transporting the data to the Carteret data center.
    \4\ Because direct line of sight between Carteret and the data
centers of other exchanges is not possible, NASDAQ's vendors leases
as many towers and associated equipment as needed to ensure an
unbroken line of sight between individual towers, repeating the
signal until it arrives at its destination.

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

    NASDAQ originally planned to create wireless connections to a data
center in Newark used by NYSE as a SFTI Network Point of Presence,
which is approximately 15 miles from NASDAQ's Carteret data center. In
2013, NYSE began to allow wireless vendors and telco vendors to connect
directly to its data center in Mahwah, NJ,\5\ which is approximately 40
miles from Carteret. Because the wireless data feeds are designed to
offer high-speed and low latency,\6\ NASDAQ determined to direct its
wireless vendors to connect to the Mahwah data center instead of the
Newark SFTI Point of Presence. As a consequence, NASDAQ is proposing to
increase the fees assessed under Rules 7015(d) [sic] and 7034(b)
relating to connectivity to data received wirelessly to and from
Mahwah, which will help offset greater costs incurred in leasing
towers, and purchasing and maintaining wireless equipment to cover the
increased distance as well as the higher costs to house equipment and
connections within the Mahwah data center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See http://www1.nyse.com/press/1337855269042.html.
    \6\ Wireless connectivity is an optional alternative to higher
latency fiber optic network connectivity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wireless Connectivity in Carteret
    Under Rule 7034(b), clients are assessed a $2,500 installation fee
(a non-recurring charge) and a monthly recurring charge (``MRC'') that
varies depending upon the feed. The MRC for the NYSE multi-cast
equities data feed, which includes NYSE ArcaBook Highspeed and NYSE
OpenBook (Aggregated or Ultra), is $10,000; the MRC for BATS Multicast
PITCH, which includes BZX and BYX, is $7,500; and the MRC for Direct
Edge Depth of Book multi-cast feed, which includes EDGA and EDGX, is
$7,500. The rates are higher for the NYSE feeds because the two feeds
are larger, and take up more bandwidth than the BATS and Direct Edge
feeds.
    Recently, NYSE announced that it is phasing out its ArcaBook High
Speed data feed,\7\ leaving the Arca Integrated data feed, which is a
low-latency alternative to ArcaBook High Speed data,\8\ as the primary
and popular data feed for Arca. Arca Integrated data feed has greater
data bandwidth requirements than the ArcaBook High Speed data feed and,
as a consequence, NASDAQ can no longer offer both the NYSE and Arca
feeds through a single wireless connection. Accordingly, NASDAQ is
proposing to offer separately NYSE Open Book \9\ and Arca Integrated
data feeds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See http://www.nyxdata.com/nysedata/default.aspx?tabid=993&id=2338.
    \8\ NYSE describes the Arca Integrated feed as a real time data
feed that provides a ``unified view of events, in sequence as they
appear on the NYSE Arca matching engine.'' See http://www.nyxdata.com/page/1084.
    \9\ The Exchange notes that NYSE has renamed its Ultrabook data
feed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ is also proposing to increase the fee assessed for wireless
connectivity to the NYSE and Arca feeds. As noted above, NASDAQ
currently assesses a one-time installation fee of $2,500, and an MRC of
$10,000 for wireless connectivity to the NYSE and Arca data feeds under
Rule 7034(d) [sic]. NASDAQ is proposing to assess an installation fee
of $5,000 and a monthly subscription fee of $12,500. NASDAQ notes that
the proposed new fees are greater than the fee currently assessed for
the Open Book Ultra and ArcaBook High Speed data feeds due to the
greater bandwidth requirements and increased costs associated with
connectivity to the Mahwah data center.
Remote Multi-cast ITCH (MITCH) Wave Ports
    NASDAQ is also proposing to increase the fees currently assessed
for MITCH Wave Ports for clients connecting to the NYSE Mahwah data
center. NASDAQ currently assesses an installation charge for the remote
port, at each of the data center locations, of $2,500 for installation,
and $7,500 as an MRC.\10\ Each of the data centers that a client may
subscribe to is approximately the same distance from the Carteret data
center, including NYSE's Newark STFI Point of Presence. As discussed
above, NASDAQ will be providing a direct connection to NYSE's data
center in Mahwah, which is significantly farther from Carteret. NASDAQ
incurs higher costs for housing its equipment at Mahwah, including
higher fees for power, cabinets and connections. Moreover and as noted
above, the Exchange and its vendors incur higher costs in leasing
towers and equipment to connect Carteret to Mahwah. As a consequence,
NASDAQ is proposing to increase the one-time installation charge to
$5,000, and the MRC to $12,500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Clients opting to pay for the remote MITCH Wave Ports will
continue to be fee liable for the applicable market data fees as
described in NASDAQ Rules 7019, 7023, and 7026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \11\ in general, and with Sections 6(b)(4) and (b)(5)
of the Act,\12\ in particular, in that it provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and
issuers and other persons using any facility or system which the
Exchange operates or controls, and is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges offer co-location services as a means to facilitate the
trading activities of those members who believe that co-location
enhances the efficiency of their trading. Accordingly, fees charged for
co-location services are constrained by the active competition for the
order flow of such members. If a particular exchange charges excessive
fees for co-location services, affected members will opt to terminate
their co-location arrangements with that exchange, and adopt a possible
range of alternative strategies, including co-locating with a different
exchange, placing their servers in a physically proximate location
outside the exchange's data center, or pursuing trading strategies not
dependent upon co-location. Accordingly, the exchange charging
excessive fees would stand to lose not only co-location revenues but
also revenues associated with the execution of orders routed to it by
affected members.
    Moreover, the Exchange believes the proposed increased fees are
reasonable because they are based on the Exchange's increased costs
incurred in connecting to Mahwah. As discussed, the greater distance
between Carteret and Mahwah results in greater costs incurred by the
Exchange and its vendors, and the Exchange is assessed higher charges
for housing its equipment at Mahwah as compared to Newark. The proposed
fees allow the Exchange to recoup these costs and make a profit, while
providing clients the ability to reduce latency in the transmission of
data by connecting directly to NYSE's data center wirelessly.
    The Exchange believes the proposed increased fees are equitably
allocated in that all clients that voluntarily select connect to, and
receive data from, NYSE through these services are charged the same
amount for the same services. Although the proposed fees are higher
than the fees charged for connectivity to other exchanges' data
centers, they are reflective of the increased costs

associated with connecting to the Mahwah data center. Accordingly, the
increased fees are allocated equitably on those that receive the
benefit of the connectivity.
    The Exchange's proposal is also consistent with the requirement of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act that Exchange rules be designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest; and are not designed to
permit unfair discrimination between clients, issuers, brokers, or
dealers. The proposal is consistent with these requirements because it
provides an optional connectivity, which promotes low-latency transfer
of data to market participants. As is true of all co-location services,
all co-located clients have the option to select this voluntary
connectivity option, and there is no differentiation among clients with
regard to the fees charged for the wireless connectivity to, and
wirelessly-received data from Mahwah.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. To the contrary,
this proposal will promote competition for distribution of market data
by offering an optional direct connection to the NYSE data center,
which will improve the latency of the connection currently available
through NYSE's STFI Point of Presence in Newark. As discussed above,
the Exchange believes that fees for co-location services, including
those proposed for microwave connectivity, are constrained by the
robust competition for order flow among exchanges and non-exchange
markets, because co-location exists to advance that competition.
Further, excessive fees for co-location services, including for
wireless technology, would serve to impair an exchange's ability to
compete for order flow rather than burdening competition.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\13\ the Exchange
has designated this proposal as establishing or changing a due, fee, or
other charge imposed by the self-regulatory organization on any person,
whether or not the person is a member of the self-regulatory
organization, which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-092 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-092. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange.
All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-
092, and should be submitted on or before October 14, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-22542 Filed 9-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 29, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18556-18557]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06434]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0796]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Testing
Communications by the Food and Drug Administration's Center for Devices
and Radiological Health

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Submit written comments (including recommendations) on the
collection of information by April 27, 2023.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be submitted to https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under Review--Open for Public
Comments'' or by using the search function. The OMB control number for
this information collection is 0910-0678. Also include the FDA docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: JonnaLynn Capezzuto, Office of
Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-
12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Testing Communications by FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological
Health

OMB Control Number 0910-0678--Extension

    FDA is authorized by section 1003(d)(2)(D) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 393(d)(2)(D)) to conduct educational
and public information programs. FDA must conduct needed research to
ensure that such programs have the highest likelihood of being
effective. Improving communications by FDA's Center for Devices and
Radiological Health (CDRH) involves many research methods, including
individual indepth interviews, mall-intercept interviews, focus groups,
self-administered surveys, gatekeeper reviews, and omnibus telephone
surveys.
    The information collected will serve three major purposes. First,
as formative research it will provide critical knowledge needed about
target audiences to develop messages and campaigns about product use.
Knowledge of consumer, caregiver, and healthcare professional decision-
making processes will provide a better understanding of target
audiences that FDA needs to design effective communication strategies,
messages, and labels.
    Second, as initial testing, the collected information will allow
FDA to assess the potential effectiveness of messages and materials in
reaching and successfully communicating with intended audiences.
Testing messages with a sample of the target audience will allow FDA to
refine messages while still in the developmental stage. Respondents
will be asked to give their reaction to the messages in either
individual or group settings.
    Third, as evaluative research, the collected information will allow
FDA to ascertain the effectiveness of the messages and the distribution
method in achieving the objectives of the message campaign. Evaluation
of message campaigns is a vital link in continuous improvement of
communications at FDA.
    FDA expects to conduct studies under this generic information
collection using

a variety of research methods. We estimate that the burden to
respondents will average 16 minutes each (varying from 5 minutes to 90
minutes). FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information
based on prior experience with the various types of data collection
methods described earlier.
    In the Federal Register of November 2, 2022 (87 FR 66192), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. No comments were received.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                   Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\ \2\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Number of
          Type of respondent/survey              Number of     responses per   Total annual          Average burden  per response           Total hours
                                                respondents     respondent       responses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     General Public
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Individual indepth interviews...............             420               1             420  0.75 (45 minutes).........................             315
General public focus group interviews.......             288               1             288  1.50 (1 hour, 30 minutes).................             432
Intercept interviews: central location......             200               1             200  0.25 (15 minutes).........................              50
Intercept interviews: telephone.............           4,000               1           4,000  0.08 (5 minutes)..........................             320
Self-administered surveys...................           2,400               1           2,400  0.25 (15 minutes).........................             600
Gatekeeper reviews..........................             400               1             400  0.50 (30 minutes).........................             200
Omnibus surveys.............................           1,200               1           1,200  0.17 (10 minutes).........................             204
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total (general public)..................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..........................................           2,121
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Healthcare Professional
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Healthcare professional individual indepth                72               1              72  0.75 (45 minutes).........................              54
 interviews.
Healthcare professional focus group                      144               1             144  1.50 (1 hour, 30 minutes).................             216
 interviews.
                                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total (healthcare professional).........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..........................................             270
    Total (overall).........................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..........................................           2,391
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
\2\ Numbers have been rounded.

    Over the next 3-year approval period, we anticipate increasing our
capability to conduct more communication surveys, which aligns with
CDRH's strategic priorities. We have adjusted our burden estimates
accordingly. Additionally, we have added an estimated hour burden for
``healthcare professional individual indepth interviews.'' These
changes reflect an overall increase of 315 burden hours and a
corresponding increase of 276 responses annually.

    Dated: March 23, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-06434 Filed 3-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on May 25, 2004

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2000-6797

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of    Northwest Airlines, Inc.      filed   4/30/04 to:

XX  Waiver from the advance filing requirements of 14 CFR 377.10(c)

XX  Renew for two years exemption under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the
following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between a point or points in the United States, via intermediate points,
to a point or points in Nigeria and beyond, and to integrate this
authority with its existing exemption and certificate authority.
Northwest operates this service pursuant to a code-share arrangement
with KLM.

Applicant rep:   Megan Rae Rosia<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT Analyst:
Sylvia Moore<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted exemption (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken:   May 25, 2004, through  May
25, 2006

XX  Granted waiver (see remarks below)

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		    Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Nigeria.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  XX Holder’s
certificate of public convenience and necessity

	   XX  Standard exemption conditions (attached)

	   XX  Statement of authorization approving Northwest/KLM code-share
operations granted

 	           May 21, 1999, and conditions therein

Conditions:  The authority granted to serve intermediate and beyond
points is limited to countries with which the United States has signed
open-skies agreements and/or countries for which the carrier holds
authority to serve under certificates or exemptions issued by the
Department, and for which it holds route integration authority by virtue
of either the present action or other action of the Department.

2

The route integration authority granted is subject to the condition that
any service provided under this exemption shall be consistent with all
applicable agreements between the United States and the foreign
countries involved.  Furthermore, (a) nothing in the award of the route
integration authority requested

should be construed as conferring upon Northwest rights (including
fifth-freedom intermediate and/or beyond rights) to serve markets where
U.S. carrier entry is limited unless Northwest notifies the Department
of its intent to serve such a market and unless and until the Department
has completed any necessary carrier selection procedures to determine
which carrier(s) should be authorized to exercise such rights; and (b)
should there be a request by any carrier to use the limited-entry route
rights that are included in Northwest’s authority by virtue of the
route integration exemption granted here, but that are not then being
used by Northwest, the holding of such authority by route integration
will not be considered as providing any preference for Northwest in a
competitive carrier selection proceeding to determine which carrier(s)
should be entitled to use the authority at issue.

Remarks:  Northwest requested a waiver from the 60-day advance filing
requirements of 14 CFR 377 to ensure that its authority would continue
in effect beyond the expiration date (June 4, 2004), pending action on
its renewal application.  On May 24, 2004, we orally granted the
request.  We confirm that action here.

________________________________________________________________________
______________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department's regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the exemption authority was consistent with the
public interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a
major regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of
1975.  To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the
referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

										05/2004

 Northwest’s previous exemption also referenced a code-share
arrangement with Alitalia, which is no longer in effect.


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 110 (Thursday, June 10, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30793-30794]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11958]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2020-0327; FRL-10024-76-Region 1]

Air Plan Approval; Maine; Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan Requirements for the 2015 Ozone Standard and Negative Declaration
for the Oil and Gas Industry for the 2008 and 2015 Ozone Standards;
Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is correcting a
final rule that was published in the Federal Register on May 13, 2021
which will be effective on June 14, 2021. The final rule approved a
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of
Maine which addresses the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act) for the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS); as well as a SIP revision containing amendments to
Maine's 06-096 CMR Chapter 110, ``Ambient Air Quality Standards,'' and
SIP revisions submitted by Maine that provide the state's
determination, via a negative declaration for the 2008 and 2015 ozone
standards, that there are no facilities within its borders subject to
EPA's 2016 Control Technique Guideline (CTG) for the oil and gas
industry. This correction does not change any final action taken by EPA
on May 13, 2021; this action merely provides further clarification on
the amendments to the regulatory

language contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and
includes a minor change to the CFR to rearrange the location of the
entry for Maine's previously approved Chapter 166 regulation.

DATES: This rule is effective on June 14, 2021.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2020-0327. All documents in the docket
are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. 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 at https://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
Region 1 Regional Office, Air and Radiation Division, 5 Post Office
Square--Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible,
you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding legal holidays and facility closures due to COVID-19.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ariel Garcia, Air Quality Branch, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office Square--
Suite 100, (Mail code 05-2), Boston, MA 02109--3912, tel. (617) 918-
1660, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR doc. 2021-06237 at 86 FR 26181 in the
issue of May 13, 2021, the following corrections to the regulatory text
are made:

Sec.  52.1019   [Corrected]

0
1. On page 26182, in the third column, in Sec.  52.1019, in amendment
2, add the section heading immediately following the instruction to
read as follows:
    ``Sec.  52.1019 Identification of plan-conditional approval.''

Sec.  52.1020   [Corrected]

0
2. On page 26183, in the third column, in Sec.  52.1020, in amendment
3, correct the instruction to read as follows:
0
``3. In Sec.  52.1020(c) amend the table by:
0
a. Revising the entry for ``Chapter 110'';
0
b. Adding entries for ``38 MRSA Sec.  341-A(3)(D)'' and ``38 MRSA Sec.
341-C(2) and 341-C(8)'' following the entry for ``38 MRSA Section 341-
C(7)''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:''

0
3. On page 26183, in the first column, in Sec.  52.1020, in amendment
4, correct the instruction to read as follows:
0
``4. In Sec.  52.1020(e), amend the table by adding entries for
``Submittal to meet Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure
Requirements for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard''; ``Conflict of Interest Statute''; and ``Negative
declaration for the 2016 Control Techniques Guideline for the Oil and
Natural Gas Industry for the 2008 and 2015 ozone standards'' at the end
of the table, to read as follows:''

    Dated: June 2, 2021.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2021-11958 Filed 6-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P