[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 233 (Wednesday, December 6, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 84815-84816]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26765]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER24-438-000]

Jade Meadow LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Jade Meadow LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for

blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of
securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure(18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is December 20, 2023.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: November 30, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-26765 Filed 12-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9025-9027]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03738]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77169; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2016-26]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending the NYSE
Arca Schedule of Options Fees and Charges

February 18, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on February 4, 2016, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca schedule of Options
Fees and Charges (``Fee Schedule'') to exclude from its average daily
volume calculations any trading day on which the Exchange is not open
for the entire trading day and/or a disruption affects an Exchange
system that lasts for more than 60 minutes during regular trading
hours. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change effective
February 4, 2016. The proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, 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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule to exclude from its
average daily volume (``ADV'') calculations any trading day on which
(1) the Exchange is not open for the entire trading day and/or (2) a
disruption affects an Exchange system that lasts for more than 60
minutes during regular trading hours. The Exchange proposes to
implement the fee change effective February 4, 2016.
    As provided in the Exchange's Fee Schedule, several of the
Exchange's transaction fees and credits are based on trading, quoting
and liquidity thresholds that involve an ADV calculation. The Exchange
proposes to add a clause permitting the Exchange to exclude from its
ADV calculation, when determining the qualification threshold for
electronic customer executions that take liquidity in a non-Penny Pilot
class from the trading interest of an Lead Market Maker (``LMM'')
(including orders and quotes) and for applicable rebate tiers
generally, contracts traded on any day on which the Exchange is not is
not [sic] open for the entire trading day. This would allow the
Exchange to exclude days where the Exchange declares a trading halt in
all securities or honors a market-wide trading halt declared by another
market as well as days on which the market closes early for holiday
observances. The Exchange's proposal is consistent

with the rules of other self-regulatory organizations.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See, e.g., NASDAQ Stock Market LLC Rule 7018(j) (``For
purposes of determining average daily volume and total consolidated
volume under this rule, any day that the market is not open for the
entire trading day will be excluded from such calculation.'');
International Securities Exchange, LLC Fee Schedule (``For purposes
of determining Priority Customer ADV, any day that the regular order
book is not open for the entire trading day or the Exchange
instructs members in writing to route their orders to other markets
may be excluded from such calculation; provided that the Exchange
will only remove the day for members that would have a lower ADV
with the day included.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The artificially low volumes of trading on days when the Exchange
is not open for the entire trading day reduces the average daily
activity of OTP Holders both daily and monthly. Given the decreased
trading volumes, the numerator for the ADV calculation (e.g., trading
volume) would be correspondingly lower, but the denominator for the
threshold calculations (e.g., the number of trading days) would not be
decreased, and could result in an unintended increase in the cost of
trading on the Exchange, a result that is unintended and undesirable to
the Exchange and its OTP Holders. The Exchange believes that the
authority to exclude days when the Exchange is not open for the entire
trading day would provide OTP Holders with greater certainty as to
their monthly costs and diminish the likelihood of an effective
increase in the cost of trading.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70657
(October 10, 2013), 78 FR 62899 (October 22, 2103) (SR-ISE-2013-51).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the Exchange proposes to modify its Fee Schedule to
permit the Exchange to exclude from its ADV calculation, contracts
traded on a trading day where a disruption affects an Exchange system
that lasts for more than 60 minutes during regular trading hours even
if such disruption would not be categorized as a complete outage of the
Exchange's system. Such a disruption may occur where a certain options
series traded on the Exchange is unavailable for trading due to an
Exchange system issue or where, while the Exchange may be able to
perform certain functions with respect to accepting and processing
orders, the Exchange may be experiencing a failure to another
significant process, such as routing to other market centers, that
would lead permit holders that rely on such process to avoid utilizing
the Exchange until the Exchange's entire system was operational. Once
again, the Exchange's proposal is consistent with the rules of other
self-regulatory organizations.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, e.g., BATS BZX Exchange Fee Schedule (``The Exchange
excludes from its calculation of ADAV and ADV shares added or
removed on any day that the Exchange's system experiences a
disruption that lasts for more than 60 minutes during regular
trading hours (``Exchange System Disruption''), on any day with a
scheduled early market close and on the last Friday in June (the
``Russell Reconstitution Day'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is not proposing any changes to the level of rebates
currently being provided on the Exchange, or to the ADV thresholds
required to achieve each rebate tier.
    The proposed change is also not otherwise intended to address any
other issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that permit
holders would have in complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\7\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in
particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and
other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to permit the Exchange
to eliminate from the calculation days on which the market is not open
the entire trading day because it preserves the Exchange's intent
behind adopting volume-based pricing. Similarly, the Exchange believes
that its proposal is reasonable because it will help provide permit
holders with a greater level of certainty as to their level of rebates
and costs for trading in any month where the Exchange experiences such
a system disruption on one or more trading days. The Exchange is not
proposing to amend the thresholds permit holders must achieve to become
eligible for, or the dollar value associated with, the tiered rebates
or fees. By eliminating the inclusion of a trading day on which a
system disruption occurs, the Exchange would almost certainly be
excluding a day that would otherwise lower members' and member
organizations' ADV, thereby making it more likely for permit holders to
meet the minimum or higher tier thresholds and thus incentivizing
permit holders to increase their participation on the Exchange in order
to meet the next highest tier.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposal is reasonable
because the proposed exclusion seeks to avoid penalizing permit holders
that might otherwise qualify for certain tiered pricing but that,
because of a significant Exchange system problem, would not participate
to the extent that they might have otherwise participated. The Exchange
believes that certain systems disruptions could preclude some permit
holders from submitting orders to the Exchange even if such issue is
not actually a complete systems outage.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposal is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory because the methodology for calculating ADV
would apply equally to all permit holders and to all volume tiers. The
Exchange notes that, although unlikely, there is some possibility that
a certain small proportion of permit holders may have a higher ADV as a
percentage of average daily volume [sic] with their activity included
from days where the Exchange experiences a system disruption. The
Exchange believes that the proposal would still be equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory given that the impacted universe is potentially
quite small and that the proposal would benefit the overwhelming
majority of market participants and would make the overall cost of
trading on the Exchange more predictable for the membership as a whole.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal
is consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\9\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that, with respect to ADV calculations for
rebates, there are very few instances where the exclusion would be
invoked, and if invoked, would have little or no impact on trading
decisions or execution quality. On the contrary, the Exchange believes
that the proposal fosters competition by avoiding a penalty to Members
for days when trading on the Exchange is disrupted for a significant
portion of the day and would result in lower total costs to end users,
a positive outcome of competitive markets. Further, other options
exchanges have adopted rules that are substantially similar to the
change in ADV calculation being proposed by the Exchange.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See note 5 [sic], supra.

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

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \11\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \12\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \13\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSEARCA-2016-26 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-NYSEARCA-2016-26. 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 the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; 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-NYSEARCA-2016-26 and should
be submitted on or before March 15, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-03738 Filed 2-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


7 June 2013

Topic of Meeting:  NPRM (78 FR 21871) Protection of Stratospheric  Ozone:  Revision of the Venting Prohibition for Specific Refrigerant Substitutes

Docket:  EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0580

Stakeholder Meeting:    Kevin Messner, AHAM

EPA Attending:  Drusilla Hufford, Paul Horwitz, Tom Land

The following were Kevin Messner's comments on the NPRM:

   * AHAM is supportive of the proposal
   * Europe is doing the same thing permitting venting of the specific HC refrigerants in the NPRM and AHAM would like to see harmonization
   * AHAM wants as many alternatives as possible for reducing impacts on the ozone layer and climate
   * AHAM believes the proposal would help reduce barriers to adoption of alternatives that are ozone layer- and climate-friendly
   * Members of the association are concerned that EPA might not finalize the rule as proposed
   * AHAM would like to see the exemption to the venting prohibition specifically for refrigerators


S7.12.4 Raw vehicle speed data is filtered with a 12-pole phaseless
Butterworth filter and a cutoff frequency of 2 Hz.
    S7.12.5 Left and right side ride height data is filtered with a
0.1-second running average filter.
    S7.12.6 The J1939 torque data collected as a digital signal does
not get filtered. J1939 torque collected as an analog signal is
filtered with a 0.1-second running average filter.
    S7.12.7 Steering wheel velocity is determined by differentiating
the filtered steering wheel angle data. The steering wheel velocity
data is then filtered with a moving 0.1-second running average filter.
    S7.12.8 Lateral acceleration, yaw rate and steering wheel angle
data channels are zeroed utilizing a defined ``zeroing range.'' The
``zeroing range'' is the 1.0-second time period prior to the instant
the steering wheel velocity exceeds 40 deg/sec. The instant the
steering wheel velocity exceeds 40 deg/sec is the instant defining the
end of the ``zeroing range.''
    S7.12.9 The beginning of steer (BOS) is the first instance filtered
and zeroed steering wheel angle data reaches -5 degrees (when the
initial steering input is counterclockwise) or +5 degrees (when the
initial steering input is clockwise). The value for time at the BOS is
interpolated.
    S7.12.10 The Completion of Steer for the sine with dwell maneuver
(COS) is the time the steering wheel angle returns to zero. The value
for time at the COS is interpolated.
    S7.12.11 The peak lateral acceleration is the maximum lateral
acceleration measured during the second half of the sine maneuver,
including the dwell period from 1.0 second after the BOS to the COS.
The lateral accelerations at 0.75 and 1.0 seconds after COS are
determined by interpolation.
    S7.12.12 The peak yaw rate is the maximum yaw rate measured during
the second half of the sine maneuver, including the dwell period from
1.0 second after the BOS to the COS. The yaw rates at 0.75 and 1.0
seconds after COS are determined by interpolation.
    S7.12.13 Determine lateral velocity by integrating corrected,
filtered and zeroed lateral acceleration data. Zero lateral velocity at
BOS event. Determine lateral displacement by integrating zeroed later
velocity. Zero lateral displacement at BOS event. Lateral displacement
at 1.50 seconds from BOS event is determined by interpolation.
    S7.12.14 The ESC activation point is the point where the measured
driver demanded torque and the engine torque first begin to deviate
from one another (engine torque decreases while driver requested torque
increases) during the slowly increasing steer maneuver. The torque
values are obtained directly from each vehicle's SAE J1939
communication data bus. Torque values used to determine the ESC
activation point are interpolated.
    S8. Compliance Date.
    S8.1 Buses. All buses manufactured on or after [date that is two
years after publication of a final rule implementing this proposal]
must comply with this standard
    S8.2 Truck tractors.
    S8.2.1 All two-axle and three-axle truck tractors with a front axle
that has a GAWR of (14,600 pounds) or less and with two rear drive
axles that have a combined GAWR of (45,000 pounds) or less manufactured
on or after [date that is two years after publication of a final rule
implementing this proposal] must comply with this standard.
    S8.2.2 All truck tractors manufactured on or after [date that is
four years after publication of a final rule implementing this
proposal] must comply with this standard.

    Issued: May 15, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-12212 Filed 5-16-12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 69 (Monday, April 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21427-21428]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08183]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77523; File No. SR-FINRA-2016-006]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change To Amend FINRA
Rules 7410 (Definitions) and 7440 (Recording of Order Information)

April 5, 2016.

I. Introduction

    On February 11, 2016, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority,
Inc. (``FINRA''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposal
to amend FINRA Rules 7410 and 7440 to require FINRA members to include
on their Order Audit Trail System (``OATS'') reports the identity of
broker-dealers that are not FINRA members when the member receives an
order from such a broker-dealer. The proposed rule change was published
for comment in the Federal Register on February 25, 2016.\3\ The
Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves
the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77180 (February 19,
2016), 81 FR 9545 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    First, FINRA proposes to define an ``SRO-assigned identifier'' in
Rule 7410 as ``a unique identifier assigned to a broker or dealer by a
national securities exchange or national securities association for use
by such broker or dealer when accessing the exchange or a facility of
the association.'' The identifier would be considered ``unique'' if the
identifier assigned by the exchange or association is used to identify
a single broker-dealer.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 9546, note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 7440 of the OATS rules to
require members that are subject to the OATS rules (``Reporting
Members'') to identify non-FINRA-member broker-dealers (``Non-Member
Firms'') from which they receive orders, on the OATS report for the
order.\5\ Under the proposed rule change, Reporting Members that
receive an order from a ``Reportable Non-Member'' (a U.S.-registered
broker-dealer that is not a FINRA member or a broker-dealer that is not
registered in the U.S. but has received an SRO-assigned identifier in
order to access certain FINRA trade reporting facilities) would be
required to identify that broker-dealer when reporting receipt of the
order to OATS.\6\ Reporting Members that receive an order from, or
route an order to, a Non-Member Firm would report one of the following:
the Non-Member Firm's Central Registration Depository (``CRD
[supreg]'') number, the Non-Member Firm's SRO-assigned identifier, or,
for a Non-Member Firm that does not have a CRD number or SRO-assigned
identifier (e.g., a foreign broker-dealer), a value indicating that the
Non-Member Firm has no CRD number or SRO-assigned identifier.\7\ The
proposed rule

change does not mandate which identifier Reporting Members must use.\8\
FINRA will be able to obtain the identity of Reportable Non-Members
from the OATS report which will make its audit trail more
comprehensive.\9\ FINRA will use the information to identify Non-Member
Firm activity in the over-the-counter market, as well as Non-Member
Firm sponsored access activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ FINRA Rule 7410(o) defines a Reporting Member as ``a member
that receives or originates an order and has an obligation to report
information under Rules 7440 and 7450.'' The rule also has
exceptions. See FINRA Rule 7410(o)(1) and (2).
    \6\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 9545-6. Certain broker-dealers
registered in Canada, but not in the U.S., have SRO-assigned
identifiers so that they can access FINRA trade reporting facilities
pursuant to FINRA Rule 7220A or 7320. Id. at 9546, n. 5.
    \7\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 9546. The OATS Reporting
Technical Specifications currently require that OATS reports include
an identifier for each national securities exchange to which an
order is routed. However, the current OATS Reporting Technical
Specifications do not require that the identity of the specific Non-
Member Firm to which an order is routed be provided. To address this
gap and to conform the reporting of orders received from and orders
routed to Non-Member Firms, FINRA intends to update the OATS
Reporting Technical Specifications to reflect the revised
requirements. See OATS Reporting Technical Specifications, at 4-4,
and A-4 to A-5 (October 12, 2015 ed.). Id. at 9546-7.
    \8\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 9546.
    \9\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 9547. FINRA stated that if the
Commission approved the proposed rule change, it would announce the
effective date of the proposed rule no later than 60 days following
Commission approval, and the effective date would be no later than
120 days following Commission approval. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    After careful review, the Commission finds that FINRA's proposal is
consistent with the requirements of Section 15A of the Act \10\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
association.\11\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\12\ which
requires, among other things, that FINRA rules be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors
and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f).
    \11\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change will provide FINRA, via OATS reports, the
identity of Reportable Non-Members that route orders or to which an
order has been routed, which will make the OATS reports more complete.
Having the information regarding which Reportable Non-Member was
involved in a transaction will enable FINRA to better surveil off-
exchange market activity as well as enhance the surveillance it
performs of exchange activity pursuant to its Regulatory Services
Agreements. FINRA will be able to consistently identify Non-Member Firm
activity, providing FINRA with a more complete view of such activities
across all exchanges and over-the-counter market centers.
    The Commission believes that requiring Reporting Members to include
the identity of Reportable Non-Members in OATS reports on orders they
receive from either a U.S.-registered broker-dealer that is not a FINRA
member or a broker-dealer that is not registered in the U.S. but has
received an SRO-assigned identifier, will provide FINRA with a more
complete view of such market participants' activities across exchanges
and over-the-counter market centers. This, in turn, should enhance
FINRA's cross-market surveillance efforts. Improved surveillance should
help FINRA detect and deter fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, and thus promote just and equitable principles of trade and
the protection of investors and the public interest.

IV. Conclusion

    It Is Therefore Ordered pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\13\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FINRA-2016-006), be and hereby
is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-08183 Filed 4-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 59 (Thursday, March 27, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17091-17092]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06698]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0248; FRL-9908-47-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Carbon Monoxide Second Limited Maintenance Plan for the
Pittsburgh Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve
a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, which consists of a second limited
maintenance plan for the carbon monoxide (CO) Pittsburgh Area (``the
Pittsburgh Area'' or ``the Area'') in Allegheny County, formerly
designated as a CO nonattainment area. In the Final Rules section of
this Federal Register, EPA is approving the Commonwealth's SIP
submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no
adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in
the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response
to this action, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives
adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by April 28, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0248 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0248, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2012-0248. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market
Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105 and at the Allegheny County
Health Department, Bureau of Environmental Quality, Division of Air
Quality, 301

39th Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15201.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emlyn V[eacute]lez-Rosa, (215) 814-
2038, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information, please see the
information provided in the direct final action, with the same title,
that is located in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this
Federal Register publication.

    Dated: March 7, 2014.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2014-06698 Filed 3-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 29, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 208)]
[Notices]
[Page 55890-55895]
[DOCID:fr29oc09-128]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket ID FMCSA-2009-0289]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 41 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 November 30, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-2009-0289 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 acknowledgment 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://www.regulations.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 41
individuals listed in this notice have recently requested an exemption
from the diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce. Accordingly, the Agency will
evaluate the qualifications of each applicant to determine whether
granting the exemption will achieve the required level of safety
mandated by the statutes.

Qualifications of Applicants

Richard A. Becker

    Mr. Becker, age 31, has had ITDM since 1991. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Becker meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Arkansas.

David M. Bridges

    Mr. Bridges, 54, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Bridges meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A Commercial Driver's
License (CDL) from Maine.

Eric M. Butz

    Mr. Butz, 28, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2009 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. Butz meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2009 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class D operator's license from Ohio.

Gerald F. Crowley

    Mr. Crowley, 38, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Crowley meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.

Paul J. Dematas

    Mr. Dematas, 22, has had ITDM since 2001. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Dematas meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
New York.

Scott J. Denham

    Mr. Denham, 35, has had ITDM since 1980. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Denham meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.

Larry E. Dickerson

    Mr. Dickerson, 37, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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.
Dickerson meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified
that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Georgia.

Lance W. Essex

    Mr. Essex, 45, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Essex meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio.

Ferral F. Ford

    Mr. Ford, 61, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2009 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. Ford meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2009 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds an operator's license from Indiana.

David E. Ginter

    Mr. Ginter, 54, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Ginter meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

William H. Goebel

    Mr. Goebel, 60, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Goebel meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Iowa.

Joseph L. Gray III

    Mr. Gray, 42, has had ITDM since 1999. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2009 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 2009 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Pennsylvania.

Ryan R. Harris

    Mr. Harris, 32, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Harris meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.

Carroll J. Hartsell

    Mr. Hartsell, 31, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Hartsell meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from West Virginia.

James S. Heinen

    Mr. Heinen, 45, has had ITDM since 1985. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Heinen meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Wisconsin.

Rita A. Hopman

    Ms. Hopman, 27, has had ITDM since 2003. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2009 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. Hopman meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
optometrist examined her in 2009 and certified that she does not have
diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class D operator's license from
Connecticut.

Shelton P. Huber

    Mr. Huber, 50, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Huber meets the requirements of the vision standard at
49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2009 and
certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class
D operator's license from Alabama.

Keith M. Huels

    Mr. Huels, 30, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Huels meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Arizona.

Daniel R. Jackson

    Mr. Jackson, 64, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Jackson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Ricky D. Jameson

    Mr. Jameson, 48, has had ITDM since 1968. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Jameson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class F operator's license from
Missouri.

Michael A. Johnson

    Mr. Johnson, 36, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Johnson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Minnesota.

Justin D. Jones

    Mr. Jones, 25, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Jones meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
Georgia.

Curtis W. Keelin, Jr.

    Mr. Keelin, 41, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Keelin meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Wyoming.

Andrew S. Knight

    Mr. Knight, 52, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Knight meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.

Patrick J. Krueger

    Mr. Krueger, 42, has had ITDM since 1970. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Krueger meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Wisconsin.

Tammy L.F. Manuel

    Ms. Manuel, 43, has had ITDM since 2009. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2009 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. Manuel meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
ophthalmologist examined her in 2009 and certified that she does not
have diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from South Carolina.

Francisco J. Martinez

    Mr. Martinez, 44, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss

of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, or
resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning
in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring;
and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to
drive a CMV safely. Mr. Martinez meets the requirements of the vision
standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2009
and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a
Class A CDL from Massachusetts.

Alan J. Maza

    Mr. Maza, 64, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2009 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. Maza meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2009 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds an operator's license from Washington.

Allan C. Moore

    Mr. Moore, 47 has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Moore meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.

Andrew W. Myer

    Mr. Myer, 27, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2009 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. Myer meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2009 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class A CDL from Nebraska.

Robert R. Napier

    Mr. Napier, 53 has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Napier meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.

Chad A. Nelson

    Mr. Nelson, 29 has had ITDM since 1994. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Nelson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Utah.

David W. Olson

    Mr. Olson, 38 has had ITDM since 1991. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2009 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. Olson meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have diabetic
retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from Arizona.

Mark Otto

    Mr. Otto, 54, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2009 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. Otto meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2009 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class A CDL from South Dakota.

Terry L. Riddell

    Ms. Riddell, 54, has had ITDM since 2007. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2009 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. Riddell meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
optometrist examined her in 2009 and certified that she does not have
diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from Indiana.

Mark E. Pascoe

    Mr. Pascoe, 50, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Pascoe meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Wisconsin.

Rodney R. Rupe

    Mr. Rupe, 41 has had ITDM since 1994. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2009 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. Rupe meets the requirements of the vision
standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in
2009 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic
retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from Kentucky.

Darrell S. Seibold

    Mr. Seibold, 41 has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Seibold meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Arizona.

Roger L. Summerfield

    Mr. Summerfield, 54 has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 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. Summerfield meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Wisconsin.

Daren D. White

    Mr. White, 39 has had ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2009 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. White meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2009 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class B CDL from Utah.

Jimmy P. Wright

    Mr. Wright, 31, has had ITDM since 1992. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wright meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's
license from Texas.

Request for Comments

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

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

    Section 4129 requires: (1) The elimination of the requirement for
three years of experience operating CMVs while being treated with
insulin; and (2) the establishment of a specified minimum period of
insulin use to demonstrate stable control of diabetes before being
allowed to operate a CMV.
    In response to section 4129, FMCSA made immediate revisions to the
diabetes exemption program established by the September 3, 2003 Notice.
FMCSA discontinued use of the 3-year driving experience and fulfilled
the requirements of section 4129 while continuing to ensure that
operation of CMVs by drivers with ITDM will achieve the requisite level
of safety required of all exemptions granted under 49 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.

    Issued on: October 21, 2009.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E9-26004 Filed 10-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 231 (Friday, November 30, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61523-61525]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25658]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0642; Product Identifier 2018-NM-087-AD; Amendment
39-19507; AD 2018-24-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 10 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a
determination that new and more restrictive maintenance requirements
and airworthiness limitations are necessary. This AD requires revising
the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate new or more restrictive maintenance requirements and
airworthiness limitations. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective January 4, 2019.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 4,
2019.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box
2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet
http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this service information at
the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0642.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0642; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Dassault Aviation Model
Falcon 10 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
August 10, 2018 (83 FR 39626). The NPRM was prompted by a determination
that more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness
limitations are necessary. The NPRM proposed to require revising the
existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate new or more restrictive maintenance requirements and
airworthiness limitations.
    We are issuing this AD to address, among other things, fatigue
cracking and damage in principal structural elements; such fatigue
cracking and damage could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2018-0078, dated April 9, 2018 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Dassault Aviation
Model Falcon 10 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    The airworthiness limitations and certification maintenance
instructions for the Dassault Falcon 10 aeroplanes, which are

approved by EASA, are currently defined and published in the
Dassault Falcon 10 [Airplane Maintenance Manual] AMM, Chapter 5-40.
These instructions have been identified as mandatory for continued
airworthiness.
    Failure to accomplish these instructions could result in an
unsafe condition [fatigue cracking and damage in principal
structural elements, which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.]
    Previously, EASA issued AD 2008-0221 to require accomplishment
of the maintenance tasks, and implementation of the airworthiness
limitations, as specified in the Dassault Falcon 10 AMM, Chapter 5-
40, at Revision 8.
    Since that [EASA] AD was issued, Dassault issued the
[Airworthiness Limitations Section] ALS, which introduces new and
more restrictive maintenance requirements and/or airworthiness
limitations.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD takes over the
requirements for Falcon 10 aeroplanes from EASA AD 2008-0221, and
requires accomplishment of the actions specified in the ALS.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0642.

Comments

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

Conclusion

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

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Dassault has issued Section 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations,
Revision 13, dated July 2017, of the Dassault Falcon 10 Maintenance
Manual. This service information describes repetitive mandatory
maintenance tasks. This service information is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 60 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
    We have determined that revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator,
although we recognize that this number may vary from operator to
operator. In the past, we have estimated that this action takes 1 work-
hour per airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or
inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), we have
determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-
airplane estimate. Therefore, we estimate the total cost per operator
to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes and
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2018-24-03 Dassault Aviation: Amendment 39-19507; Docket No. FAA-
2018-0642; Product Identifier 2018-NM-087-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 4, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 10
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new and more
restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations
are necessary. We are issuing this AD to address, among other
things, fatigue cracking and damage in principal structural
elements; such fatigue cracking and damage could result in reduced
structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the
existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate Section 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 13,
dated July 2017, of the Dassault Falcon 10 Maintenance Manual
(``Section 5-40-00''). The initial compliance time for accomplishing
the actions is at the applicable time specified in Section 5-40-00;
or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD; whichever
occurs later.

(h) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or
intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA); or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2018-0078, dated April 9, 2018,
for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on
the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0642.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Section 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 13,
dated July 2017, of the Dassault Falcon 10 Maintenance Manual.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000,
South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on November 8, 2018.
Chris Spangenberg,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-25658 Filed 11-29-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 202 (Friday, October 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 72513]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23220]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4738-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]

Georgia; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Georgia (FEMA-4738-DR), dated September 7, 2023, and
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued September 9, 2023.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Georgia is hereby amended to include permanent work
under the Public Assistance program for those areas determined to have
been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the
President in his declaration of September 7, 2023.

    Appling, Atkinson, Bacon, Berrien, Brantley, Brooks, Bulloch,
Camden, Candler, Charlton, Clinch, Coffee, Colquitt, Echols,
Emanuel, Jeff Davis, Jenkins, Lanier, Pierce, Screven, Tattnall,
Thomas, Tift, Ware, and Wayne Counties for Public Assistance.
    Cook, Glynn, and Lowndes Counties for permanent work [Categories
C-G] (already designated for Individual Assistance and assistance
for debris removal and emergency protective measures [Categories A
and B], including direct federal assistance, under the Public
Assistance program).

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

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-23220 Filed 10-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 216 (Thursday, November 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 60134]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24357]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE:  Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of
the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Wednesday,
December 18, 2019 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE:  The meeting will be held in Auditorium LL-002 at the
Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

STATUS:  This meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. (ET) and will be open to
the public. Seating will be on a first-come, first-served basis.
Visitors will be subject to security checks. The meeting will be
webcast on the Commission's website at www.sec.gov.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
    The subject matter of the Open Meeting will be:
     The Commission will consider whether to approve the 2020
budget of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board and the related
annual accounting support fee for the Board under Section 109 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed,
please contact Vanessa A. Countryman, Office of the Secretary, at (202)
551-5400.

    Dated: November 4, 2019.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-24357 Filed 11-5-19; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P