[Federal Register: November 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 224)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 67308-67311]
[DOCID:fr21no06-10]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2006-0390; FRL-8244-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Louisiana; Baton Rouge Ozone Nonattainment Area Vehicle Miles Traveled
Offset Analysis

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this direct final action, the EPA is approving the Baton
Rouge Ozone Nonattainment Area Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Offset
Analysis. The Baton Rouge area became subject to this requirement upon
its reclassification from serious to severe 1-hour ozone nonattainment.
The State has satisfied the VMT Offset requirement by its demonstration
that motor vehicle emissions from increases in VMT or number of vehicle
trips within the Baton Rouge five county ozone nonattainment area will
not rise above an established ceiling through 2005. This action is
being taken under sections 110 and 182 of the Federal Clean Air Act, as
amended (the Act).

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on January 22, 2007 without
further notice, unless EPA receives relevant adverse comment by
December 21, 2006. If EPA receives such comment, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that
this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R06-
OAR-2006-0390, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     U.S. EPA Region 6 ``Contact Us'' Web site: http://epa.gov/region6/r6coment.htm.
 Please click on ``6PD'' (Multimedia) and select

``Air'' before submitting comments.
     E-mail: Mr. Thomas Diggs at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
also cc the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section below.
     Fax: Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), at fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
     Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air
Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Such deliveries are
accepted only between the hours of 8am and 4pm weekdays except for
legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2006-0390. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.

The http://www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,

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

your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

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

(6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file will be made available by
appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review Room
between the hours of 8:30am and 4:30pm weekdays except for legal
holidays. Contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese at<PHONE_NUMBER> to make an
appointment. If possible, please make the appointment at least two
working days in advance of your visit. There will be a 15 cent per page
fee for making photocopies of documents. On the day of the visit,
please check in at the EPA Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas.
    The State submittal is also available for public inspection at the
State Air Agency listed below during official business hours by
appointment:
    Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, 602 N. Fifth Street,
Baton Rouge, LA 70802.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Sandra Rennie at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Air Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region
6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, fax number
214-665-7263; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Analysis of VMT Plan
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

What Is a VMT SIP?

    Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the Act requires states containing ozone
nonattainment areas classified as severe, pursuant to section 181(a) of
the Act, to adopt transportation control strategies and TCMs to offset
increases in emissions resulting from growth in VMT or numbers of
vehicle trips and to obtain reductions in motor vehicle emissions as
necessary (in combination

with other emission reduction requirements) to comply with the Act's
Reasonable Further Progress milestones (section 182(b)(1) and
(c)(2)(B)) and attainment demonstration requirements (section
182(c)(2)(A)). Our interpretation of section 182(d)(1)(A) is discussed
in the April 16, 1992, General Preamble to Title I of the Act (57 FR
13498, the General Preamble). Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the Act requires
that states submit the VMT Offset SIP by November 15, 1992, for any
severe and above ozone nonattainment area. The VMT Offset SIP became a
requirement for the Baton Rouge area due to EPA's reclassification of
the area from serious to severe on April 24, 2003 (68 FR 20077).

How Is the VMT Offset Requirement Satisfied?

    The EPA General Preamble (57 FR 13498, 13521-13523, April 16, 1992)
explains how to demonstrate that the VMT requirement is satisfied.
Sufficient measures must be adopted so projected motor vehicle volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions will stay beneath a ceiling level
established through modeling of mandated transportation-related
controls. When growth in VMT and vehicle trips would otherwise cause a
motor vehicle emissions upturn, this upturn must be prevented by TCMs.
If projected total motor vehicle emissions during the ozone season in
one year are not higher than during the previous ozone season due to
the control measures in the SIP, the VMT Offset requirement is
satisfied. In order to make these projections, curves of vehicle
emissions were modeled using mandated measures, along with VMT (please
refer to Charts 1 and 2 in the Technical Support Document). Charts 1
and 2 each show significant declines in VOC emissions from on-road
mobile sources during the 15-year period graphed for the offset
analysis. The charts profile the effects of several factors that are
affecting emissions simultaneously, including but not limited to: (a)
The ``fleet turnover'' effect derived from implementation of Federal
motor vehicle control program (National Low Emission Vehicle and Tier
2/low sulfur gasoline); (b) the nonattainment area's low enhanced
vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program, and; (c) either the
sale and use of reformulated gasoline (Chart 1 only), or the continued
sale and use of convention gasoline (Chart 2 only).\1\ Also
contributing to the decline in emissions growth is the fact that
inventoried and projected VMT data has actually decreased slightly
during the 1996-2005 time period by approximately two (2) percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The use of Reformulated Gasoline (RFG) in the Baton Rouge
nonattainment area was suspended in July 2004 by the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and the Court transferred the case
and motion to stay to the D.C. Circuit. This offset analysis
includes analyses of both RFG and conventional gas fuels scenarios.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Analysis of VMT Plan

What Does Louisiana's Demonstration Show?

    The March 22, 2005, VMT Offset Analysis SIP submittal includes a
projection of the mobile source emissions and a VMT projection for
Baton Rouge through 2005, the date by which the Baton Rouge area was to
attain the 1-hour NAAQS for ozone. It contains a modeled scenario that
includes the effects of reductions from the following mandated
programs: federal motor vehicle control programs (Tier 2/Low Sulfur
Gasoline Program Credits and National Low Emission Vehicle Credits), a
low enhanced vehicle I/M program, and either reformulated gasoline or
Federal 7.8 Reid Vapor Pressure gasoline (Charts 1 and 2,
respectively).

Results of Analysis

    The modeled curves satisfy the VMT Offset requirement as discussed
in the General Preamble. Modeling at no time shows the emission
estimates meeting or exceeding the lowest point in 2005. The VOC curves
in these instances show that no true ceiling is established in this
demonstration because there is no upward turn of the VOC curve to
identify the lowest point. Because the curves do not turn upward, no
TCMs are necessary to offset emissions from growth in VMT. Because
there is no upturn in VOCs and no ceiling under which VOC emissions
must remain, then no TCMs are required to keep emissions below any
ceiling.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving Louisiana's VMT Offset Analysis SIP submitted by
the State on March 22, 2005. The VMT Offset requirement is satisfied
because projected total motor vehicle emissions during the ozone season
in one year are not higher than during the ozone season the year before
due to the control measures in the SIP. We determined that Louisiana
has adequately demonstrated that emissions from growth in VMT and
number of vehicle trips will not rise above an established ceiling
during the required timeframe.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because we view
this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments
are received. This rule will be effective on January 22, 2007 without
further notice unless we receive relevant adverse comment by December
21, 2006. If we receive adverse comments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule
will not take effect. We will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will not institute
a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in
commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if we receive
adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and
if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may
adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of
an adverse comment.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This

action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 22, 2007. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: November 9, 2006.
Richard E. Greene,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart T--Louisiana

0
2. The table in Sec.  52.970(e) entitled, ``EPA Approved Louisiana
Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures,'' is amended by
adding to the end of the table a new entry for ``Baton Rouge Ozone
Nonattainment Area Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset Analysis'' to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.970  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                  EPA Approved Louisiana Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Applicable geographic       State
       Name of SIP provision          or  nonattainment      Submittal/     EPA  approval       Explanation
                                             area          effective date       date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset       Baton Rouge                  03/22/05        11/21/06  [Insert FR page
 Analysis.                           Nonattainment Area.                                    number where
                                                                                document begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E6-19641 Filed 11-20-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


 ADVANCE \y63

	UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

	REGION III

1650 Arch Street

	Philadelphia, Pennsylvania  19103-2029

									January 28, 2013

The Honorable Randy C. Huffman

Cabinet Secretary, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection

601 57th Street SE

Charleston, West Virginia 25304

Dear Secretary Huffman:

 On December 13, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a revision to the West Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP).  The SIP revision was submitted to address required infrastructure elements of Section 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) which are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2010 1- hour nitrogen dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in West Virginia.  EPA has determined that the submittal is complete for these elements.

If members of your staff have any questions, they may direct them to Ms. Jacqueline Lewis, Office of Air Program Planning, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

	Sincerely,

						/s/

           Diana Esher, Director

                                                                       Air Protection Division

cc:  John A. Benedict, Director, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection

	Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on January 26, 2006

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2005-23148

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

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

Application of   America West Airlines, Inc.    filed   11/23/2005 for:

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

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between Charlotte, North Carolina, and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on
the one hand, and Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands, on the other hand, and
authority to integrate this authority with its existing certificate and
exemption authority.

America West states that it requests this authority in order to offer
service under a code-share arrangement with US Airways, its sister
airline, with US Airways operating the service.

Applicant rep:  Howard Kass<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT Analyst: Gerald Caolo
<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX	Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken:  January 26, 2006, through
January 26, 2008 .

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

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

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

	XX  The holder’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

	XX  Standard exemption conditions (attached)

2

Conditions:

The code-share operations conducted under this authorization are subject
to the following conditions:

The code-sharing operations conducted under this authority must comply
with 14 CFR 257 and with any amendment to the Department’s regulations
concerning code-share arrangements that may be adopted.  Notwithstanding
any provisions in the contract between the carriers, our approval here
is expressly conditioned upon the requirements that the subject foreign
air transportation be sold in the name of the carrier holding out such
service in computer reservation systems and elsewhere; that the carrier
selling such transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on the ticket)
accept responsibility for the entirety of the code-share journey for all
obligations established in its contract of carriage with the passenger;
and that the passenger liability of the operating carrier be unaffected;
and

The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that neither
America West nor US Airways shall give any force or effect to any
contractual provisions between themselves that are contrary to these
conditions.

The route integration authority granted is subject to the condition that
any service provided under this exemption shall be consistent with all
applicable agreements between the United States and the foreign
countries involved.  Furthermore, (a) nothing in award of the route
integration authority granted should be construed as conferring upon
America West rights (including fifth-freedom intermediate and/or beyond
rights) to serve markets where U.S. carrier entry is limited unless
America West notifies the Department of its intent to serve such a
market and unless and until the Department has completed any necessary
carrier selection procedures to determine which carrier(s) should be
authorized to exercise such rights; and (b) should there be a request by
any carrier to use the limited-entry route rights that are included in
America West’s authority by virtue of the route integration exemption
granted here, but that are not then being used by America West, the
holding of such authority by route integration will not be considered as
providing any preference for America West in a competitive carrier
selection proceeding to determine which carrier(s) should be entitled to
use the authority at issue.

________________________________________________________________________
______

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

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

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

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

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

				APPENDIX

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

05/2004

  America West states that on September 27, 2005, America West Holdings
Corporation merged with US Airways Group, Inc.  As a result of this
merger, America West became a subsidiary of US Airways Group and is
beginning operations under the “US Airways” brand name.  Although
selling tickets, advertising, and marketing itself under the “US
Airways” brand name, America West will continue to operate under its
own certificate of public convenience and necessity and authorities
until both America West and US Airways are integrated under a single
certificate.

 PAGE


[Federal Register: January 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 19)]
[CORRECTIONS]
[Page 5270]
[DOCID:fr29ja08-128]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 8873; Release No. 56986]

Securities Act of 1933; Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Order
Approving Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Budget and Annual
Accounting Support Fee for Calendar Year 2008

December 18, 2007.

Correction

    In notice document E7-24909 beginning on page 73501 in the issue of
Wednesday, December 26, 2007, make the following correction:
    On page 73051, after the subject heading the date should appear as
above.

[FR Doc. Z7-24909 Filed 1-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25077-25078]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08934]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2020-0134]

Commercial Driver's License: Tornado Bus Company (Tornado);
Application for Exemption

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition; denial of application for
exemption.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to deny the exemption request
from the Tornado Bus Company (Tornado). Tornado requests an exemption
from certain provisions of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs) for its drivers who currently hold a Mexican Licencia Federal
de Conductor (LFC), and are seeking permanent resident status in the
United States through the Department of Homeland Security and have over
two years' experience driving in the United States (U.S.) and Mexico.
The exemption would cover general entry-level driver training (ELDT)
requirements, required knowledge testing for the commercial driver's
license (CDL), required skills testing for the CDL, and requirements
for knowledge and skills testing to obtain a CDL passenger endorsement.
FMCSA analyzed the exemption application and public comments and
determined that the application does not demonstrate that the exemption
would likely ensure a level of safety equivalent to or greater than
would be achieved absent such exemption.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard Clemente, FMCSA Driver and
Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle
Safety Standards;<PHONE_NUMBER>. [email protected]. If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, go to www.regulations.gov, insert the docket
number ``FMCSA-2020-0134'' in the keyword box, and click ``Search.''
Next, sort the results by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first
notice listed, click ``Browse Comments.''
    To view documents mentioned in this notice as being available in
the docket, go to www.regulations.gov, insert the docket number
``FMCSA-2020-0134'' in the keyword box, click ``Search,'' and chose the
document to review.
    If you do not have access to the internet, you may view the docket
online by visiting Dockets Operations in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call
(202) 366-9317 or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting Dockets Operations.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in the
Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the
public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the
application, including any safety analyses that have been conducted.
The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public comment on the
request.
    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level achieved
without the exemption (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of the Agency must
be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(b)) with the
reasons for denying or granting the application and, if granted, the
name of the person or class of persons receiving the exemption, and the
regulatory provision from which the exemption is granted. The notice
must also specify the effective period (up to 5 years) and explain the
terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed (49
CFR 381.300(b)).

III. Background

Current Regulatory Requirements

    Under 49 CFR 380.609, as of February 7, 2022, entry-level driver
training (ELDT) is required for individuals applying for a Commercial
Driver's License (CDL) for the first time; upgrading a current CDL from
Class B to Class A; or obtaining a Passenger (P), School bus (S), or
Hazardous materials (H) endorsement for the first time. All drivers of
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) requiring a CDL must have the
knowledge and skills specified in 49 CFR 383.111 and 383.113,
respectively. An applicant for a P endorsement to a CDL must satisfy
both the knowledge and skills required by 49 CFR 383.117.

Applicant's Request

    Tornado requested an exemption from the following regulatory
requirements: 49 CFR 380.609 (General ELDT requirements); 49 CFR
383.111 (Required knowledge); 49 CFR 383.113 (Required skills); and 49
CFR 383.117 (Requirements for passenger endorsement) for its drivers
who currently hold an LFC and are seeking permanent resident status in
the United States from the Department of Homeland Security. Tornado
requested the exemption because it is experiencing a shortage of
qualified drivers to support its operation, with adverse effects on its
finances.

IV. Method To Ensure an Equivalent or Greater Level of Safety

    To ensure an equivalent level of safety, Tornado emphasizes that
the operation of its vehicles would not be impacted since all drivers
will have over two years of experience driving buses in the U.S. and
Mexico. When hired, all Tornado drivers receive training in the U.S.,
which includes the

following topics: (1) Hours of service; (2) vehicle inspections; (3)
drug and alcohol; (4) safety and security; (5) Americans With
Disabilities Act (ADA); (6) equipment training; and (7) Smith System
Training (defensive driving classroom and operational). Tornado did not
provide specific information addressing the content or rigor of the
training it provides.

V. Public Comments

    On July 14, 2021, FMCSA published notice of Tornado's application
and requested public comments (86 FR 37209). The Agency received
comments from the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (Teamsters)
and two individuals. All three commenters opposed the exemption
request. The Teamsters said that Tornado has not sufficiently
demonstrated that the exemption would likely achieve a level of safety
equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved by the
current regulations. According to the Teamsters:

    Tornado states that the drivers for which they are seeking
exemptions from the FMCSRs will have had over two years of
experience driving in the U.S. and Mexico. But that experience is
not differentiated by country. By their broad statement, it cannot
be determined if a driver has more than one-day's experience driving
in the U.S., and that most of the time has been spent operating in
Mexico.

    The Teamsters added:

    Tornado offers no specifics like the number of hours of in-
classroom training it offers its drivers hired in the U.S., other
than stating what subjects it includes in its training. Tornado's
application for exemption contains no safety analysis and it states
that its operation `is significantly affected financially' once
their drivers obtain permanent residence status due to the time
consumption to process their CDL. Financial considerations should
never outweigh safety.

    In summary, the Teamsters concluded, ``these drivers who receive
permanent residence status must operate in the U.S. with a U.S. CDL.
They no longer can use the Mexican LFC. Therefore, they must take the
necessary steps to qualify for the U.S. CDL.''
    The two individual commenters stated that the Agency should not
grant exemptions based on financial considerations and that doing so
would result in a weakening of the necessary training that these
drivers would otherwise receive.

VI. FMCSA Safety Analysis and Decision

    FMCSA evaluated the Tornado application and the public comments and
is denying the exemption. In order to obtain a CDL an applicant must
pass both skills and knowledge tests to demonstrate the proficiency
required to safely operate a CMV on a public road. In addition,
beginning February 7, 2022, the Agency's entry-level driver training
standards apply to individuals applying for a CDL for the first time;
an upgrade of their CDL (e.g., a Class B CDL holder seeking a Class A
CDL); or a hazardous materials (H), passenger (P), or school bus (S)
endorsement for the first time.
    Because the applicant did not provide any specific information on
either the content or rigor of the training it provides for its drivers
hired to operate in the U.S., FMCSA has no basis to conclude that
granting the exemption would achieve a level of safety equivalent to,
or greater than the level achieved without the exemption.

Robin Hutcheson,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022-08934 Filed 4-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 93 (Tuesday, May 14, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21395-21396]
[FR Doc No: 2019-09941]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0138]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Hearing

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 27 individuals
for an exemption from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor
vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would
enable these hard of hearing and deaf individuals to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 13, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0138 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions
regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket
Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0138), indicate the specific section of
this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for
each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that FMCSA can contact you if there are questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
put the docket number, FMCSA-2018-0138, in the keyword box, and click
``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on the ``Comment Now!''
button and type your comment into the text box on the following screen.
Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual or on
behalf of a third party and then submit.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period.

B. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2018-0138, in the keyword box, and
click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket Folder'' button and
choose the document to review. If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information

the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the FMCSRs for a five-year period if it finds such exemption would
likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater
than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption. The
statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the
five-year period. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-
year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical
certification.
    The 27 individuals listed in this notice have requested an
exemption from the hearing requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11).
Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications of each
applicant to determine whether granting the exemption will achieve the
required level of safety mandated by statute.
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person first perceives a forced
whispered voice in the better ear at not less than 5 feet with or
without the use of a hearing aid or, if tested by use of an audiometric
device, does not have an average hearing loss in the better ear greater
than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a
hearing aid when the audiometric device is calibrated to American
National Standard (formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5--1951.
    This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow
drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing
aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).
    On February 1, 2013, FMCSA announced in a Notice of Final
Disposition titled, Qualification of Drivers; Application for
Exemptions; National Association of the Deaf, (78 FR 7479), its
decision to grant requests from 40 individuals for exemptions from the
Agency's physical qualification standard concerning hearing for
interstate CMV drivers. Since the February 1, 2013 notice, the Agency
has published additional notices granting requests from hard of hearing
and deaf individuals for exemptions from the Agency's physical
qualification standard concerning hearing for interstate CMV drivers.

III. Qualifications of Applicants

Selwyn Abrahamson

    Mr. Abrahamson, age 30, holds an operator's license in Minnesota.

Oluwatobim Akinsanya

    Mr. Akinsanya, age 37, holds an operator's license in New Jersey.

Denis J. Ayers

    Mr. Ayers, age 40, holds an operator's license in Maryland.

Cesare Belardi

    Mr. Belardi, age 44, holds an operator's license in Pennsylvania.

Robert M. Benner

    Mr. Benner, age 44, holds a class A CDL in Ohio.

Jubal Carnley

    Mr. Carnley, age 33, holds an operator's license in Florida.

Jason M. Clark

    Mr. Clark, age 34, holds a class A operator's license in Missouri.

Erik De Leon

    Mr. De Leon, age 26, holds an operator;s license in Texas.

Kareem M. Douglas

    Mr. Douglas, age 45, holds an operator's license in Ohio.

Jacob Gadreault

    Mr. Gadreault, age 26, holds a class A CDL in Massachusetts.

Boris D. Garth

    Mr. Garth, age 52, holds an operator's license in Alabama.

Lane Grover

    Mr. Grover, age 47, holds an operator's license in Indiana.

Michael S. Haywood

    Mr. Haywood, age 27, holds an operator's license in Texas.

David J. Kakubowski

    Mr. Jabubowski, age 63, holds an operator's license in California.

Scott W. Lufkin

    Mr. Lufkin, age 41, holds an operator's license in North Carolina.

Billie Jo Martinez

    Mr. Martinez, age 39, holds an operaator's license in Texas.

Steve Martinez

    Mr. Martinez, age 54, holds an operator's license in Colorado.

Sergio Miramontes

    Mr. Miramontes, age 46, holds an operator's license in California.

Jonathan A. Muhm

    Mr. Muhm, age 39, holds a class A CDL in California.

Karl Ortiz

    Mr. Ortiz, age 41, holds an operator's license in Missouri.

Andreas Shije

    Mr. Shije, age 28, holds an operator's license in New Mexico.

Mildred A. Smith

    Mr. Smith, age 51, holds an operator's license in Arkansas.

Joseph Strassberg

    Mr. Strassburg, age 31, holds an operator's license in South
Dakota.

James Thomason

    Mr. Thomason, age 37, holds an operator's license in Missouri.

Gerld Wager, Jr.

    Mr. Wager, age 41, holds an operator's license in North Carolina.

Jeremy A. Williamson Sr.

    Mr. Williamson, age 43, holds an operator's license in California.

Matthew Whitehouse

    Mr. Whitehouse, age 30, holds an operator's license in Washington.

IV. 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 dates
section of the notice.

    Issued on: May 8, 2019.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-09941 Filed 5-13-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 10, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71535-71537]
[FR Doc No: 2020-24809]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0708; Airspace Docket No. 20-ACE-14]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Waterloo, IA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the Class D and Class E airspace at
Waterloo Regional Airport, Waterloo, IA. This action is the result of
an airspace review due to the closure of runway 6/24 at Waterloo
Regional Airport. The names and geographic coordinates of the airport
and navigational aids are also being updated to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, February 25, 2021. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1 Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends the Class D airspace, Class E surface airspace, Class E
airspace area designated as an extension to Class D and Class E surface
airspace, and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Waterloo Regional Airport, IA, to support instrument flight
rule operations at this airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (85 FR 49607; August 14, 2020) for Docket No. FAA-2020-0708 to
amend the Class D and Class E airspace at Waterloo Regional Airport,
Waterloo, IA. Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the
FAA. No comments were received.
    Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraph
5000, 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11E, dated
July 21, 2020, and effective September 15, 2020, which is incorporated
by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E airspace designations
listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71:
    Amends the Class D airspace at Waterloo Regional Airport, Waterloo,
IA, by updating the name (previously Waterloo Municipal Airport) and
geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database; and replaces the outdated term ``Airport/
Facility Directory'' with ``Chart Supplement'';
    Amends the Class E surface area Waterloo Regional Airport by
updating the name (previously Waterloo Municipal Airport) and
geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database; and replaces the outdated term ``Airport/
Facility Directory'' with ``Chart Supplement'';
    Amends the Class E airspace area designated as an extension to
Class D and Class E surface airspace at Waterloo Regional Airport by
removing the extensions east, south, and southwest of the VORTAC, as
they are no longer needed; adds an extension within 1 mile each side of
the 128[deg] bearing from the Waterloo Regional: RWY 12-LOC extending
from the 4.3-mile radius of the Waterloo Regional Airport to 4.4 miles
southeast of the Waterloo Regional Airport; amends the extension north
of the VOR/DME to the 356[deg] radial (previously 351[deg] radial); and
updates the name and geographic coordinates of the Waterloo Regional
Airport (previously Waterloo Municipal Airport) and the name of the
Waterloo VOR/DME (previously Waterloo VORTAC) to coincide with the
FAA's aeronautical database;
    And amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Waterloo Regional Airport by removing the
extension southeast of the airport, as it is no longer needed; adds an
extension 2.4 miles each side of the 313[deg] radial of the Waterloo
VOR/DME extending from the 6.8-mile radius of the Waterloo Regional
Airport to 7 miles northwest of the Waterloo VOR/DME; adds an extension
2.4 miles each side of the 356[deg] radial of the Waterloo VOR/DME
extending from the 6.8-mile radius of the Waterloo Regional Airport to
7 miles northwest of the Waterloo VOR/DME; and updates the name and
geographic coordinates of the Waterloo Regional Airport (previously
Waterloo Municipal Airport) and the name of the Waterloo VOR/DME
(previously Waterloo VORTAC) to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical
database.
    This action is due to an airspace review caused by the closure of
runway 6/24 at Waterloo Regional Airport.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ACE IA D Waterloo, IA [Amended]

Waterloo Regional Airport, IA
    (Lat. 42[deg]33'26'' N, long. 92[deg]24'01'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,400 feet MSL within a 4.3-mile radius of Waterloo Regional
Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific
dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and times will thereafter be continuously published
in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as a Surface Area.

* * * * *

ACE IA E2 Waterloo, IA [Amended]

Waterloo Regional Airport, IA
    (Lat. 42[deg]33'26'' N, long. 92[deg]24'01'' W)

    Within a 4.3-mile radius of Waterloo Regional Airport. This
Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and
times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective
date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart
Supplement.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to
a Class D or Class E Surface Area.

* * * * *

ACE IA E4 Waterloo, IA [Amended]

Waterloo Regional Airport, IA
    (Lat. 42[deg]33'26'' N, long. 92[deg]24'01'' W)

Waterloo Regional: RWY 12-LOC

    (Lat. 42[deg]32'55'' N, long. 92[deg]22'53'' W)

Waterloo VOR/DME

    (Lat. 42[deg]33'23'' N, long. 92[deg]23'56'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1 mile
each side of the 128[deg] bearing from the Waterloo Regional: RWY
12-LOC extending from the 4.3-mile radius of the Waterloo Regional
Airport to 4.4-miles southeast of the Waterloo Regional Airport, and
within 2.4 miles each side of the 313[deg] radial from the Waterloo
VOR/DME extending from the 4.3-mile radius of the Waterloo Regional
Airport to 7 miles northwest of the Waterloo VOR/DME, and within 2.4
miles each side of the 356[deg] radial from the Waterloo VOR/DME
extending from the 4.3-mile radius of the Waterloo Regional Airport
to 7 miles north of the Waterloo VOR/DME.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ACE IA E5 Waterloo, IA [Amended]

Waterloo Regional Airport, IA
    (Lat. 42[deg]33'26'' N, long. 92[deg]24'01'' W)
Waterloo VOR/DME
    (Lat. 42[deg]33'23'' N, long. 92[deg]23'56'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.8-mile radius of Waterloo Regional Airport, and within
2.4 miles each side of the 313[deg] radial from the Waterloo VOR/DME
extending from the 6.8-mile radius of the Waterloo Regional Airport
to 7 miles northwest of the Waterloo VOR/DME, and within 2.4 miles
each side of the 356[deg] radial from the Waterloo VOR/DME extending
from the 6.8-mile radius of the Waterloo Regional Airport to 7 miles
north of the Waterloo VOR/DME.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 4, 2020.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2020-24809 Filed 11-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P