[Federal Register: February 1, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 22)]
[Notices]
[Page 6248-6256]
[DOCID:fr01fe08-137]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket ID. FMCSA-2007-0070]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 66 individuals
for exemptions from the prohibition against persons with insulin-
treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) operating commercial motor vehicles
(CMVs) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable
these individuals with ITDM to operate commercial motor vehicles in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 3, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-2007-0070 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
 Follow the on-line instructions for submitting

comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket ID for
this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140

on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78; Apr. 11, 2000).
This information is also available at http://Docketinfo.dot.gov.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for a 2-year period if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that
would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The statutes also allow the
Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The 66
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

William E. Amidon

    Mr. Amidon, age 71, has had ITDM since 1982. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Amidon meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Florida.

Jack H. Badger, Jr.

    Mr. Badger, 67, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Badger meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Florida.

Richard L. Burwell

    Mr. Burwell, 42, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Burwell meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio.

Scott A. Campbell

    Mr. Campbell, 42, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Campbell meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
Pennsylvania.

David Clemente, Sr.

    Mr. Clemente, 51, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Clemente meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist

examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have diabetic
retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Jersey.

Mark D. Cleveland

    Mr. Cleveland, 52, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Cleveland meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from Washington.

Timothy M. Collier

    Mr. Collier, 39, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Collier meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's
license from New York.

Danny R. Combs

    Mr. Combs, 52, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Combs meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Minnesota.

Robert S. Crawford

    Mr. Crawford, 60, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Crawford meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Anthony S. Cruise

    Mr. Cruise, 37, has had ITDM since 2002. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Cruise meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a chauffeur's license from Indiana.

James D. Daly

    Mr. Daly, 56, has had ITDM since 1992. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Daly meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
Pennsylvania.

James Davis

    Mr. Davis, 68, has had ITDM since 1989. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Davis meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from New Jersey.

William M. Dement

    Mr. Dement, 27, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Dement meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Missouri.

Lizzie L. Dixon

    Ms. Dixon, 36, has had ITDM since 2006. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2007 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. Dixon meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
optometrist examined her in 2007 and certified that she does not have
diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class D operator's license from New
Jersey.

Nathan J. Donley

    Mr. Donley, 27, has had ITDM since 1999. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes

management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Donley meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from Ohio.

Billy R. Echols

    Mr. Echols, 56, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Echols meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Alabama.

Jonathan B. Estridge

    Mr. Estridge, 28, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Estridge meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Arizona.

Gregory A. Fisher

    Mr. Fisher, 48, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Fisher meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio.

Linda G. Flock

    Ms. Flock, 64, has had ITDM since 1995. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2007 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. Flock meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
ophthalmologist examined her in 2007 and certified that she has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from
California.

Kurt D. Genat

    Mr. Genat, 35, has had ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Genat meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from Texas.

Kerri J. Gibson

    Ms. Gibson, 34, has had ITDM since 1994. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2007 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. Gibson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
optometrist examined her in 2007 and certified that she does not have
diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class F operator's license from
Missouri, which allows her to drive any motor vehicle with a gross
vehicle rating of less than 26,001 pounds.

Carlos F. Gonzales

    Mr. Gonzales, 58, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gonzales meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
Texas.

Larry D. Goughnour

    Mr. Goughnour, 49, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Goughnour meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Pennsylvania.

Ronald G. Gross

    Mr. Gross, 67, has had ITDM since 1999. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gross meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

James O. Hamilton

    Mr. Hamilton, 57, has had ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the

assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands
diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control of his
diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hamilton
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio.

Chester C. Holland

    Mr. Holland, 63, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Holland meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Florida.

Justin J. Hughes

    Mr. Hughes, 27, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hughes meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from California.

Phillip R. Hutchinson

    Mr. Hutchinson, 30, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hutchinson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
Oregon.

Bradley J. Ingemann

    Mr. Ingemann, 29, has had ITDM since 1996. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Ingemann meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Minnesota.

Robert M. Jasuta

    Mr. Jasuta, 38, has had ITDM since 1989. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Jasuta meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Pennsylvania.

William B. Jenks, Jr.

    Mr. Jenks, 58, has had ITDM since 1994. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Jenks meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Utah.

Timothy L. Johnson

    Mr. Johnson, 37, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Johnson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.

Daniel R. Jones

    Mr. Jones, 52, has had ITDM since 2001. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Jones meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.

Glenn R. Kerns

    Mr. Kerns, 58, has had ITDM since 2001. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kerns meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Michigan.

Kenneth M. Kostelny

    Mr. Kostelny, 53, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss

of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, or
resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning
in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management and monitoring;
and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to
drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kostelny meets the requirements of the vision
standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2007
and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a
Class A CDL from New York.

Douglas O. Krosch

    Mr. Krosch, 57, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Krosch meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.

John Lewis, Jr.

    Mr. Lewis, 68, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Lewis meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from
California.

Robert E. Martin

    Mr. Martin, 23, has had ITDM since 1987. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Martin meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Missouri.

Henry M. McCurdy

    Mr. McCurdy, 63, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. McCurdy meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Mississippi.

Thomas J. Montgomery

    Mr. Montgomery, 54, has had ITDM since 1996. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Montgomery meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Michigan.

Robert L. Morden

    Mr. Morden, 54, has had ITDM since 1986. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Morden meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Arkansas.

Jerry L. Morris

    Mr. Morris, 54, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Morris meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Mississippi.

Michael D. Mumma

    Mr. Mumma, 44, has had ITDM since 1999. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Mumma meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Harold R. Newton

    Mr. Newton, 37, has had ITDM since 1998. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Newton meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Arizona.

Clayton W. Noe

    Mr. Noe, 25, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined
him

in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Noe meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2007 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.

Derek J. Page

    Mr. Page, 39, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Page meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have diabetic
retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.

Garrett A. Phillips

    Mr. Phillips, 23, has had ITDM since 1991. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Phillips meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
New York.

Gary P. Pitts

    Mr. Pitts, 60, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Pitts meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Texas.

Bruce P. Quaintance

    Mr. Quaintance, 57, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Quaintance meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Jersey.

Randy L. Quattlebaum

    Mr. Quattlebaum, 47, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Quattlebaum meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Texas.

Curtis L. Reed, Jr.

    Mr. Reed, 53, has had ITDM since 2001. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Reed meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have diabetic
retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from Mississippi.

Everette W. Roberts

    Mr. Roberts, 55, has had ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Roberts meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's
license from Alabama.

Mark C. Smith

    Mr. Smith, 43, has had ITDM since 2002. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smith meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Nebraska.

Ryan B. Smith

    Mr. Smith, 32, has had ITDM since 1988. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smith meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Alabama.

Billy J. Stamper

    Mr. Stamper, 29, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him

in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Stamper meets the requirements
of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have diabetic
retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Oklahoma.

Ralph J. Sternhagen

    Mr. Sternhagen, 45, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sternhagen meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Iowa.

Robert E. Tauriainen

    Mr. Tauriainen, 46, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Tauriainen meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
Oregon.

David B. Tomlin

    Mr. Tomlin, 50, has had ITDM since 1992. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Tomlin meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Alabama.

Brian T. Tow

    Mr. Tow, 49, has had ITDM since 1990. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Tow meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Washington.

Larry N. Trimble

    Mr. Trimble, 55, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Trimble meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Arizona.

Frederick J. Van Aken, III

    Mr. Van Aken, 32, has had ITDM since 1993. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Van Aken meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
California.

Roger K. VanDenbark

    Mr. VanDenbark, 62, has had ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. VanDenbark meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Indiana.

Kenneth D. Wallace

    Mr. Wallace, 56, has had ITDM since 1999. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wallace meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
Georgia.

Kelly A. Walling

    Mr. Walling, 64, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Walling meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A operator's
license from South Carolina.

Gary J. Weiss

    Mr. Weiss, 44, has had ITDM since 1993. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Weiss meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2007 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
South Carolina.

Danny L. Wood

    Mr. Wood, 58, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2007 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes using insulin,
and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wood meets the requirements of
the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2007 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class B CDL from Oregon.

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.
    FMCSA notes that Section 4129 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible
and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-
LU) requires the Secretary to revise its diabetes exemption program
established on September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441).\1\ The revision must
provide for individual assessment of drivers with diabetes mellitus,
and be consistent with the criteria described in section 4018 of the
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 31305).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Section 4129 requires: (1) The elimination of the requirement for
three years of experience operating CMVs while being treated with
insulin; and (2) the establishment of a specified minimum period of
insulin use to demonstrate stable control of diabetes before being
allowed to operate a CMV.
    In response to section 4129, FMCSA made immediate revisions to the
diabetes exemption program established by the September 3, 2003 Notice.
FMCSA discontinued use of the 3-year driving experience and fulfilled
the requirements of section 4129 while continuing to ensure that
operation of CMVs by drivers with ITDM will achieve the requisite level
of safety required of all exemptions granted under 49 U.S.C. 31136 (e).
    Section 4129(d) also directed FMCSA to ensure that drivers of CMVs
with ITDM are not held to a higher standard than other drivers, with
the exception of limited operating, monitoring and medical requirements
that are deemed medically necessary. FMCSA concluded that all of the
operating, monitoring and medical requirements set out in the September
3, 2003 Notice, except as modified, were in compliance with section
4129(d). Therefore, all of the requirements set out in the September 3,
2003 Notice, except as modified by the Notice in the Federal Register
on November 8, 2005 (70 FR 67777), remain in effect.

    Dated: January 28, 2008.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
 [FR Doc. E8-1898 Filed 1-31-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69666-69667]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28354]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Tuesday, November
20, 2012 at 2:00 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the
scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Walter as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session, and determined that
no earlier notice thereof was possible.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting will be:

    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings; and
    Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 16, 2012.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-28354 Filed 11-16-12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 183 (Friday, September 20, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 57905]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23013]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: [To be Published]

STATUS: Closed Meeting.

PLACE: 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC.

DATE AND TIME OF PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED MEETING: Tuesday, September 17,
2013 at 4:00 p.m.

CHANGE IN THE MEETING: Cancellation of Meeting.
    The Closed Meeting scheduled for Tuesday, September 17, 2013 at
4:00 p.m. was cancelled.
    For further information please contact the Office of the Secretary
at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 17, 2013.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-23013 Filed 9-18-13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 176)]
[Notices]
[Page 55626-55627]
[DOCID:fr13se10-98]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[DOT Docket No. DOT-OST-2010-0074]

 Office of the Secretary of Transportation: The Future of
Aviation Advisory Committee (FAAC) Environment Subcommittee; Notice of
Meeting

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the Secretary of
Transportation.

ACTION: The Future of Aviation Advisory Committee (FAAC) Environment
Subcommittee; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation (DOT), Office of the
Secretary of Transportation, announces a meeting of the FAAC
Environment Subcommittee, which will be held by teleconference. This
notice announces the date and time of the meeting, which will be open
to the public. The purpose of the FAAC is to provide advice and
recommendations to the Secretary of Transportation to ensure the
competitiveness of the U.S. aviation industry and its capability to
manage effectively the evolving transportation needs, challenges, and
opportunities of the global economy. The Environment Subcommittee is
charged with examining steps and strategies that can be taken by
aviation-sector stakeholders and the Federal Government to reduce
aviation's environmental footprint and foster sustainability gains in
cost-effective ways. This includes consideration of potential
approaches to promote effective international actions through the
International Civil Aviation Organization.

DATES: The meeting will be held on September 20, 2010, from 1 p.m. to 4
p.m. Eastern Daylight Time.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held via teleconference. Call-in
information will be provided to members of the public who register to
participate.
    Public Access: The meeting is open to the public. (See below for
registration instructions.)
    Public Comments: Persons wishing to offer written comments and
suggestions concerning the activities of the advisory committee or
Environment Subcommittee should file comments in the Public Docket
(Docket Number DOT-OST-2010-0074 at http://www.regulations.gov) or
alternatively through the<EMAIL_ADDRESS>e-mail. If comments and
suggestions are intended specifically for the Environment Subcommittee,
the term ``Environment'' should be listed in the subject line of the
message. To ensure such comments can be considered by the subcommittee
before its September 20, 2010, meeting, public comments must be filed
by 5 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on Wednesday, September 15, 2010.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. App. 2), we are giving notice of a meeting of the Environment
Subcommittee of the Future of Aviation Advisory Committee taking place
on September 20, 2010, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time. The
meeting will be held by teleconference. The agenda includes--
    1. Discussion of operational and technological improvements,
sustainable alternative fuels, and harmonized domestic and global
efforts that can contribute to reducing aviation carbon emissions.
    2. Consideration of public comments.
    3. Identification of potential recommendations for presentation at
the next meeting of the full committee.

Registration

    The meeting can accommodate up to 15 members of the public. Persons
desiring to call in must preregister through e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by
5 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time Wednesday, September 15, 2010. The term
``Registration: Environment'' should be listed in the subject line of
the message and participation will be limited to the first 15 persons
to preregister and receive a confirmation of their preregistration.
Instructions for participating by phone will be provided with
registration confirmation. Minutes of the meeting will be taken and
will be made available to the public.

Requests for Special Accommodation

    The DOT is committed to providing equal access to this meeting for
all participants. If you need alternative formats or services because
of a disability, please send a request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>with the term
``Special Accommodations'' listed in the subject line of the message by
close of business Wednesday, September 15, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynne Pickard, Deputy Director, Office
of Environment and Energy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-
3577; fax<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 7, 2010.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Designated Federal Official, Future of Aviation Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2010-22653 Filed 9-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


(i) Notification that a small control device has become a large control device and the site-specific test plan shall be submitted within 60 days of the date the small control device becomes a large control device. The site-specific test plan shall include the information specified in paragraph (h)(2) of this section. Approval of the site-specific test plan shall follow paragraph (h)(2) of this section.
    (ii) Results of the performance test required by §63.1413(a)(1)(ii) shall be submitted within 150 days of the date the small control device becomes a large control device.
    (7) Whenever a continuous process vent becomes subject to control requirements under §63.1405(a), as a result of a process change, the owner or operator shall submit a report within 60 days after the performance test or applicability assessment, whichever is sooner. The report may be submitted as part of the next Periodic Report required by paragraph (f) of this section.
    (i) The report shall include the following information:
    (A) A description of the process change;
    (B) The results of the recalculation of the organic HAP concentration, volumetric flow rate, and or TRE index value required under §63.1412 and recorded under §63.1416(f).
    (C) A statement that the owner or operator will comply with the requirements specified in §63.1405.
    (ii) If a performance test is required as a result of a process change, the owner or operator shall specify that the performance test has become necessary due to a process change. This specification shall be made in the performance test notification to the Administrator, as specified in paragraph (h)(3) of this section.
    (iii) If a process change does not result in additional applicable requirements, then the owner or operator shall include a statement documenting this in the next Periodic Report required by paragraph (f) of this section.
    (8) Electronic reporting. Within 60 days after the date of completing each performance test (as defined in §63.2), the owner or operator must submit the results of the performance tests, including any associated fuel analyses, required by this subpart according to the methods specified in paragraphs (h)(8)(i) or (ii) of this section.
    (i) For data collected using test methods supported by the EPA-provided software, the owner or operator shall submit the results of the performance test to the EPA by direct computer-to-computer electronic transfer via EPA-provided software, unless otherwise approved by the Administrator. Owners or operators, who claim that some of the information being submitted for performance tests is confidential business information (CBI), must submit a complete file using EPA-provided software that includes information claimed to be CBI on a compact disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage media to the EPA. The electronic media must be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAPQS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: WebFIRE Administrator, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA by direct computer-to-computer electronic transfer via EPA-provided software.
    (ii) For any performance test conducted using test methods that are not compatible with the EPA-provided software, the owner or operator shall submit the results of the performance test to the Administrator at the appropriate address listed in §60.4.
    (i) Operating permit application. An owner or operator who submits an operating permit application instead of a Precompliance Report shall submit the information specified in paragraph (d) of this section, Precompliance Report, as applicable.
    (j) Alternative monitoring parameters. The owner or operator who has been directed by any section of this subpart or any section of another subpart referenced by this subpart that expressly referenced this paragraph (j) to set unique monitoring parameters, or who requests approval to monitor a different parameter than those specified in §63.1415(b), shall submit the information specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this section in the Precompliance Report, as required by paragraph (d) of this section.
    (1) The required information shall include a description of the parameter(s) to be monitored to ensure the recovery device, control device, or control technology is operated in conformance with its design and achieves the specified emission limit or percent reduction and an explanation of the criteria used to select the parameter(s).
    (2) The required information shall include a description of the methods and procedures that will be used to demonstrate that the parameter indicates proper operation, the schedule for this demonstration, and a statement that the owner or operator will establish a level for the monitored parameter as part of the Notification of Compliance Status report required in paragraph (e) of this section, unless this information has already been included in the operating permit application.
    (3) The required information shall include a description of the proposed monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting system to include the frequency and content of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. Further, the rationale for the proposed monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting system shall be included if either condition in paragraph (j)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section is met:
    (i) If monitoring and recordkeeping is not continuous; or
    (ii) If reports of daily average values will not be included in Periodic Reports when the monitored parameter value is above the maximum level or below the minimum level as established in the operating permit or the Notification of Compliance Status.
    (k) Alternative continuous monitoring. An owner or operator choosing not to implement the monitoring provisions specified in §63.1415 for storage vessels, continuous process vents, batch process vents, or aggregate batch vent streams may instead request approval to use alternative continuous monitoring provisions according to the procedures specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (4) of this section. Requests shall be submitted in the Precompliance Report as specified in paragraph (d)(4) of this section if not already included in the operating permit application and shall contain the information specified in paragraphs (k)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section, as applicable.
    (1) The provisions in §63.8(f)(5)(i) shall govern the review and approval of requests.
    (2) An owner or operator of an affected source that does not have an automated monitoring and recording system capable of measuring parameter values at least once every 15 minutes and that does not generate continuous records may request approval to use a nonautomated system with less frequent monitoring in accordance with paragraphs (k)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
    (i) The requested system shall include manual reading and recording of the value of the relevant operating parameter no less frequently than once per hour. Daily average (or batch cycle daily average) values shall be calculated from these hourly values and recorded.
    (ii) The request shall contain:
    (A) A description of the planned monitoring and recordkeeping system;
    (B) Documentation that the affected source does not have an automated monitoring and recording system;
    (C) Justification for requesting an alternative monitoring and recordkeeping system; and
    (D) Demonstration to the Administrator's satisfaction that the proposed monitoring frequency is sufficient to represent control or recovery device operating conditions, considering typical variability of the specific process and control or recovery device operating parameter being monitored.
    (3) An owner or operator may request approval to use an automated data compression recording system that does not record monitored operating parameter values at a set frequency (for example, once every 15 minutes) but records all values that meet set criteria for variation from previously recorded values, in accordance with paragraphs (k)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.
    (i) The requested system shall be designed to:
    (A) Measure the operating parameter value at least once every 15 minutes;
    (B) Except for the monitoring of batch process vents, calculate hourly average values each hour during periods of operation;
    (C) Record the date and time when monitors are turned off or on;
    (D) Recognize unchanging data that may indicate the monitor is not functioning properly, alert the operator, and record the incident;
    (E) Calculate daily average, batch cycle daily average, or block average values of the monitored operating parameter based on all measured data; and
    (F) If the daily average is not a deviation, as defined in §63.1413(i), from the operating parameter, the data for that operating day may be converted to hourly average values, and the four or more individual records for each hour in the operating day may be discarded.
    (ii) The request shall contain:
    (A) A description of the monitoring system and data compression recording system, including the criteria used to determine which monitored values are recorded and retained;
    (B) The method for calculating daily averages and batch cycle daily averages; and
    (C) A demonstration that the system meets all criteria in paragraph (k)(3)(i) of this section.
    (4) An owner or operator may request approval to use other alternative monitoring systems according to the procedures specified in §63.8(f)(4).
§63.1418   [Reserved]
§63.1419   Implementation and enforcement.
    (a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by the U.S. EPA, or a delegated authority such as the applicable State, local, or Tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA Administrator has delegated authority to a State, local, or Tribal agency, then that agency, in addition to the U.S. EPA, has the authority to implement and enforce this subpart. Contact the applicable U.S. EPA Regional Office to find out if implementation and enforcement of this subpart is delegated to a State, local, or Tribal agency.
    (b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this subpart to a State, local, or Tribal agency under subpart E of this part, the authorities contained in paragraph (c) of this section are retained by the Administrator of U.S. EPA and cannot be transferred to the State, local, or Tribal agency.
    (c) The authorities that cannot be delegated to State, local, or Tribal agencies are as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this section.
    (1) Approval of alternatives to the requirements in §§63.1400 through 63.1401 and 63.1404 through 63.1410. Where these standards reference another subpart, the cited provisions will be delegated according to the delegation provisions of the referenced subpart. Where these standards reference another subpart and modify the requirements, the requirements shall be modified as described in this subpart. Delegation of the modified requirements will also occur according to the delegation provisions of the referenced subpart.
    (2) Approval of major alternatives to test methods under §63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f), as defined in §63.90, and as required in this subpart.
    (3) Approval of major alternatives to monitoring under §63.8(f), as defined in §63.90, and as required in this subpart.
    (4) Approval of major alternatives to recordkeeping and reporting under §63.10(f), as defined in §63.90, and as required in this subpart.
Table 1 to Subpart OOO of Part 63 -- Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart OOO Affected Sources
                                   Reference
                            Applies to subpart OOO
                                  Explanation
63.1(a)(1)
Yes
§63.1402 specifies definitions in addition to or that supersede definitions in §63.2.
63.1(a)(2)
Yes

63.1(a)(3)
Yes
§63.1401(i) identifies those standards which overlap with the requirements of subpart OOO of this part and specify how compliance shall be achieved.
63.1(a)(4)
Yes
Subpart OOO (this table) specifies the applicability of each paragraph in subpart A of this part.
63.1(a)(5)
No
[Reserved].
63.1(a)(6)
Yes

63.1(a)(7)-63.1(a)(9)
No
[Reserved].
63.1(a)(10)
Yes

63.1(a)(11)
Yes

63.1(a)(12)-63.1(a)(14)
Yes

63.1(b)(1)
No

63.1(b)(2)
Yes

63.1(b)(3)
No
§63.1400(e) provides documentation requirements for APPUs not considered affected sources.
63.1(c)(1)
Yes
Subpart OOO (this table) specifies the applicability of each paragraph in subpart A of this part.
63.1(c)(2)
No
Area sources are not subject to this subpart.
63.1(c)(3)
No
[Reserved].
63.1(c)(4)
No
[Reserved].
63.1(c)(5)
Yes
Except that affected sources are not required to submit notifications overridden by this table.
63.1(d)
No
[Reserved].
63.1(e)
Yes

63.2
Yes
§63.1402 specifies the definitions from subpart A of this part that apply to this subpart.
63.3
Yes

63.4(a)(1)-63.4(a)(3)
Yes

63.4(a)(4)
No
[Reserved].
63.4(a)(5)
Yes

63.4(b)
Yes

63.4(c)
Yes

63.5(a)(1)
Yes
Except the terms "source" and "stationary source" should be interpreted as having the same meaning as "affected source."
63.5(a)(2)
Yes

63.5(b)(1)
Yes
Except §63.1400(d) specifies when construction or reconstruction is subject to new source standards.
63.5(b)(2)
No
[Reserved].
63.5(b)(3)
Yes

63.5(b)(4)
Yes
Except that the Initial Notification and §63.9(b) requirements do not apply.
63.5(b)(5)
Yes

63.5(b)(6)
Yes
Except that §63.1400(d) specifies when construction or reconstruction is subject to new source standards.
63.5(c)
No
[Reserved].
63.5(d)(1)(i)
Yes
Except that the references to the Initial Notification and §63.9(b)(5) do not apply.
63.5(d)(1)(ii)
Yes
Except that §63.5(d)(1)(ii)(H) does not apply.
63.5(d)(1)(iii)
No
§63.1417(e) specifies Notification of Compliance Status requirements.
63.5(d)(2)
No

63.5(d)(3)
Yes
Except §63.5(d)(3)(ii) does not apply, and equipment leaks subject to §63.1410 are exempt.
63.5(d)(4)
Yes

63.5(e)
Yes

63.5(f)(1)
Yes

63.5(f)(2)
Yes
Except that where §63.9(b)(2) is referred to, the owner or operator need not comply.
63.6(a)
Yes

63.6(b)(1)
Yes

63.6(b)(2)
Yes

63.6(b)(3)
Yes

63.6(b)(4)
Yes

63.6(b)(5)
Yes

63.6(b)(6)
No
[Reserved].
63.6(b)(7)
No

63.6(c)(1)
Yes
Except that §63.1401 specifies the compliance date.
63.6(c)(2)
No

63.6(c)(3)
No
[Reserved].
63.6(c)(4)
No
[Reserved].
63.6(c)(5)
Yes

63.6(d)
No
[Reserved].
63.6(e)
Yes
Except as otherwise specified in this table.
63.6(e)(1)(i)
No
See §63.1400(k)(4) for general duty requirement.
63.6(e)(1)(ii)
No

63.6(e)(1)(iii)
Yes

63.6(e)(2)
Yes

63.6(e)(3)
No

63.6(f)(1)
No

63.6(f)(2)
Yes
Except §63.7(c), as referred to in §63.6(f)(2)(iii)(D), does not apply, and except that §63.6(f)(2)(ii) does not apply to equipment leaks subject to §63.1410.
63.6(f)(3)
Yes

63.6(g)
Yes

63.6(h)
No
This subpart OOO does not require opacity and visible emission standards.
63.6(i)(1)
Yes

63.6(i)(2)
Yes

63.6(i)(3)
Yes

63.6(i)(4)(i)(A)
Yes

63.6(i)(4)(i)(B)
No
Dates are specified in §§63.1401(e) and 63.1417(d)(1).
63.6(i)(4)(ii)
No

63.6(i)(5)-(14)
Yes

63.6(i)(15)
No
[Reserved].
63.6(i)(16)
Yes

63.6(j)
Yes

63.7(a)(1)
Yes

63.7(a)(2)
No
§63.1417(e) specifies the submittal dates of performance test results for all emission points except equipment leaks; for equipment leaks, compliance demonstration results are reported in the Periodic Reports.
63.7(a)(3)
Yes

63.7(b)
No
§63.1417 specifies notification requirements.
63.7(c)
No

63.7(d)
Yes

63.7(e)(1)
No
See §63.1413(a)(2).
63.7(e)(2)
Yes

63.7(e)(3)
No
Subpart OOO specifies requirements.
63.7(e)(4)
Yes

63.7(f)
Yes
Except that if a site specific test plan is not required, the notification deadline in §63.7(f)(2)(i) shall be 60 days prior to the performance test, and in §63.7(f)(3), approval or disapproval of the alternative test method shall not be tied to the site specific test plan.
63.7(g)
Yes
Except that the requirements in §63.1417(e) shall apply instead of the references to the Notification of Compliance Status report in §63.9(h). In addition, equipment leaks subject to §63.1410 are not required to conduct performance tests.
63.7(h)
Yes
Except §63.7(h)(4)(ii) may not be applicable, if the site-specific test plan in §63.7(c)(2) is not required.
63.8(a)(1)
Yes

63.8(a)(2)
No

63.8(a)(3)
No
[Reserved].
63.8(a)(4)
Yes

63.8(b)(1)
Yes

63.8(b)(2)
No
Subpart OOO specifies locations to conduct monitoring.
63.8(b)(3)
Yes

63.8(c)(1)
Yes

63.8(c)(1)(i)
No

63.8(c)(1)(ii)
No

63.8(c)(1)(iii)
No

63.8(c)(2)
Yes

63.8(c)(3)
Yes

63.8(c)(4)
No
§63.1415 specifies monitoring frequency; not applicable to equipment leaks because §63.1410 does not require continuous monitoring systems.
63.8(c)(5)-63.8(c)(8)
No

63.8(d)
No

63.8(e)
No

63.8(f)(1)-63.8(f)(3)
Yes

63.8(f)(4)(i)
No
Timeframe for submitting request is specified in §63.1417 (j) or (k); not applicable to equipment leaks because §63.1410 (through reference to 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU) specifies acceptable alternative methods.
63.8(f)(4)(ii)
No
Contents of request are specified in §63.1417(j) or (k).
63.8(f)(4)(iii)
No

63.8(f)(5)(i)
Yes

63.8(f)(5)(ii)
No

63.8(f)(5)(iii)
Yes

63.8(f)(6)
No
Subpart OOO does not require continuous emission monitors.
63.8(g)
No
Data reduction procedures specified in §63.1416(a) and (h); not applicable to equipment leaks.
63.9(a)
Yes

63.9(b)
No
Subpart OOO does not require an initial notification.
63.9(c)
Yes

63.9(d)
Yes

63.9(e)
No
§63.1417 specifies notification deadlines.
63.9(f)
No
Subpart OOO does not require opacity and visible emission standards.
63.9(g)
No

63.9(h)
No
§63.1417(e) specifies Notification of Compliance Status requirements.
63.9(i)
Yes

63.9(j)
No

63.10(a)
Yes

63.10(b)(1)
No
§63.1416(a) specifies record retention requirements.
63.10(b)(2)
No
Subpart OOO specifies recordkeeping requirements.
63.10(b)(3)
No
§63.1400(e) requires documentation of sources that are not affected sources.
63.10(c)
No
§63.1416 specifies recordkeeping requirements.
63.10(d)(1)
Yes

63.10(d)(2)
No
§63.1417 specifies performance test reporting requirements; not applicable to equipment leaks.
63.10(d)(3)
No
Subpart OOO does not require opacity and visible emission standards.
63.10(d)(4)
Yes

63.10(d)(5)
No
See §63.1417(g) for malfunction reporting requirements.
63.10(e)
No
§63.1417 specifies reporting requirements.
63.10(f)
Yes

63.11
Yes
Except that instead of §63.11(b), §63.1413(g) shall apply.
63.12
Yes

63.13-63.15
Yes

Table 2 to Subpart OOO of Part 63 -- Known Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP) From the Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins
                                  Organic HAP
                                  CAS Number
Organic HAP subject to cooling tower monitoring requirements in §63.1409 (Yes/No)

                                   Column A
                                   Column B
Acrylamide
79-06-1
No
No
Aniline
62-53-3
Yes
No
Biphenyl
92-52-4
Yes
Yes
Cresol and cresylic acid (mixed)
1319-77-3
Yes
No
Cresol and cresylic acid (m-)
108-39-4
Yes
No
Cresol and cresylic acid (o-)
95-48-7
Yes
No
Cresol and cresylic acid (p-)
106-44-5
Yes
No
Diethanolamine
111-42-2
No
No
Dimethylformamide
68-12-2
No
No
Ethylbenzene
100-41-4
Yes
Yes
Ethylene glycol
107-21-1
No
No
Formaldehyde
50-00-0
Yes
No
Glycol ethers
0
No
No
Methanol
67-56-1
Yes
Yes
Methyl ethyl ketone
78-93-3
Yes
Yes
Methyl isobutyl ketone
108-10-1
Yes
Yes
Naphthalene
91-20-3
Yes
Yes
Phenol
108-95-2
Yes
No
Styrene
100-42-5
Yes
Yes
Toluene
108-88-3
No
Yes
Xylenes (NOS)
1330-20-7
Yes
Yes
Xylene (m-)
108-38-3
Yes
Yes
Xylene (o-)
95-47-6
Yes
Yes
Xylene (p-)
106-42-3
Yes
Yes
    CAS No. = Chemical Abstract Registry Number.
Table 3 to Subpart OOO of Part 63 -- Batch Process Vent Monitoring Requirements
                                Control device
                          Parameters to be monitored
                     Frequency/recordkeeping requirements
Scrubber[a]
pH of scrubber effluent, and
Continuous records as specified in §63.1416(d).[b]

Scrubber liquid and gas flow rates
Continuous records as specified in §63.1416(d).[b]
Absorber[a]
Exit temperature of the absorbing liquid, and
Continuous records as specified in §63.1416(d).[b]

Exit specific gravity for the absorbing liquid
Continuous records as specified in §63.1416(d).[b]
Condenser[a]
Exit (product side) temperature
Continuous records as specified in §63.1416(d).[a]
Carbon adsorber[a]
Total regeneration steam flow or nitrogen flow, or pressure (gauge or absolute) during carbon bed regeneration cycle(s), and
Record the total regeneration steam flow or nitrogen flow, or pressure for each carbon bed regeneration cycle.

Temperature of the carbon bed after regeneration and within 15 minutes of completing any cooling cycle(s)
Record the temperature of the carbon bed after each regeneration and within 15 minutes of completing any cooling cycle(s).
Thermal incinerator
Firebox temperature[c]
Continuous records as specified in §63.1416(d).[b]
Catalytic incinerator
Temperature upstream and downstream of the catalyst bed
Continuous records as specified in §63.1416(d).[b]
Boiler or process heater with a design heat input capacity less than 44 megawatts and where the batch process vents or aggregate batch vent streams are not introduced with or used as the primary fuel
Firebox temperature[c]
Continuous records as specified in §63.1416(d).[b]
Flare
Presence of a flame at the pilot light
Hourly records of whether the monitor was continuously operating during batch emission episodes, or portions thereof, selected for control and whether a flame was continuously present at the pilot light during said periods.
All control devices
Diversion to the atmosphere from the control device or
Hourly records of whether the flow indicator was operating during batch emission episodes, or portions thereof, selected for control and whether a diversion was detected at any time during said periods as specified in §63.1416(d).

Monthly inspections of sealed valves
Records that monthly inspections were performed as specified in §63.1416(d).
Scrubber, absorber, condenser, and carbon adsorber (as an alternative to the requirements previously presented in this table)
Concentration level or reading indicated by an organic monitoring device at the outlet of the control device
Continuous records as specified in §63.1416(d).[b]
    [a]Alternatively, these devices may comply with the organic monitoring device provisions listed at the end of this table.
    [b]"Continuous records" is defined in §63.111.
    cMonitor may be installed in the firebox or in the ductwork immediately downstream of the firebox before any substantial heat exchange is encountered.
Table 4 to Subpart OOO of Part 63 -- Operating Parameter Levels
                                    Device
                          Parameters to be monitored
                      Established operating
parameter(s)
Scrubber
pH of scrubber effluent; and scrubber liquid and gas flow rates
Minimum pH; and minimum liquid/gas ratio
Absorber
Exit temperature of the absorbing liquid; and exit specific gravity of the absorbing liquid
Maximum temperature; and maximum specific gravity
Condenser
Exit temperature
Maximum temperature
Carbon absorber
Total regeneration steam or nitrogen flow, or pressure (gauge or absolute)[a] during carbon bed regeneration cycle; and temperature of the carbon bed after regeneration (and within 15 minutes of completing any cooling cycle(s))
Maximum flow or pressure; and maximum temperature
Thermal incinerator
Firebox temperature
Minimum temperature
Catalytic incinerator
Temperature upstream and downstream of the catalyst bed
Minimum upstream temperature; and minimum temperature difference across the catalyst bed
Boiler or process heater
Firebox temperature
Minimum temperature
Other devices (or as an alternate to the requirements previously presented in this table)[b]
Organic HAP concentration level or reading at outlet of device
Maximum organic HAP concentration or reading
    [a]25 to 50 mm (absolute) is a common pressure level obtained by pressure swing absorbers.
    [b]Concentration is measured instead of an operating parameter.
Table 5 to Subpart OOO of Part 63 -- Reports Required by This Subpart
                                   Reference
                             Description of report
                                   Due date
§63.1400(j) and Subpart A of this part
Refer to Table 1 and Subpart A of this part
Refer to Subpart A of this part.
63.1417(d)
Precompliance Report
Existing affected sources -- 12 months prior to the compliance date. New affected sources -- with application for approval of construction or reconstruction.
63.1417(e)
Notification of Compliance Status
Within 150 days after the compliance date.
63.1417(f)
Periodic Reports
Semiannually, no later than 60 days after the end of each 6-month period. See §63.1417(f)(1) for the due date for the first report.
63.1417(f)(12)
Quarterly reports upon request of the administrator
No later than 60 days after the end of each quarter.
63.1417(g)
Start-up, shutdown, and malfunction reports
Semiannually (same schedule as Periodic reports).
63.1417(h)(1)
Notification of storage vessel inspection
As specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart WW.
63.1417(h)(2)
Site-specific test plan
90 days prior to planned date of test.
63.1417(h)(3)
Notification of planned performance test
30 days prior to planned date of test.
63.1417(h)(4)
Notification of change in primary product
As specified in §63.1400 (g)(7) or (g)(8).
63.1417(h)(5)
Notification of added emission points
180 days prior to the appropriate compliance date.
63.1417(h)(6)
Notification that a small control device has been redesignated as a large control device
Within 60 days of the redesignation of control device size.
63.1417(h)(7)
Notification of process change
Within 60 days after performance test or applicability assessment, whichever is sooner.
63.1417(h)(8)
Electronic reporting
Within 60 days after completing performance test.
    aNote that the APPU remains subject to this subpart until the notification under §63.1400(g)(7) is made.
[65 FR 3290, Jan. 20, 2000, as amended at 79 FR 60935, Oct. 8, 2014]
Table 6 to Subpart OOO of Part 63 -- Coefficients for Total Resource Effectiveness[a]
                             Control device basis
                            Values of coefficients

                                       A
                                       B
                                       C
Flare
                                                              5.276 x 10[−1]
                                                               9.98 x 10[−2]
                                                              2.096 x 10[−3]
Thermal Incinerator 0 Percent Recovery
                                                              4.068 x 10[−1]
                                                               1.71 x 10[−2]
                                                              8.664 x 10[−3]
Thermal Incinerator 70 Percent Recovery
                                                              6.868 x 10[−1]
                                                               3.21 x 10[−3]
                                                              3.546 x 10[−3]
    [a]Use according to procedures outlined in this section.
    MJ/scm = MegaJoules per standard cubic meter.
    scm/min = Standard cubic meters per minute.


[Federal Register: April 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 71)]
[Notices]
[Page 17504]
[DOCID:fr15ap09-99]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1827-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2008-0018]

New York; 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 New York (FEMA-1827-DR), dated March 4, 2009, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: March 24, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, 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 New York is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of March 4, 2009.

    Albany, Columbia, Delaware, Greene, Rensselaer, Saratoga,
Schenectady, Schoharie, and Washington Counties for Public
Assistance [Category E] (already designated for Categories A, B, C,
F, and G), 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.

Nancy Ward,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
 [FR Doc. E9-8547 Filed 4-14-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


 Summary of EPA Ethics Review Campbell, J. ( 1984) A Comparison of the metabolism of 14 C Amitraz in rat, mouse, baboon and human. Unpublished study performed by FBC Ltd., Chesterford Park Research Station, UK, under project number Metab/ 84/ 01. 20 p. MRID 00160964.

Campbell, J.; Needham, D. ( 1984) Urinary Excretion of ( Carbon 14) Amitraz by Two Humans Following a Single Oral Dose of 0.25 mg/ kg Bodyweight: M70. Unpublished study performed by FBC Ltd., Chesterford Park Research Station,

UK, under project number Metab/ 84/ 10, 17L. 12 p. MRID 46249601 Amitraz 84 Metabolism Study ° Conducted at FBC Ltd., Chesterford Park Research Station in UK in 1984 ° Component of multi species study of comparative metabolism Amitraz 84 " Framework"

1. Value   Not published or disseminated   Societal value not addressed in reports 2. Scientific Validity: Defer to others 3. Subject Selection   Adult male volunteers from unknown pool   Subjects may have been lab employees Amitraz 84 " Framework"  2 4. Risk Benefit Ratio   No information relevant to assessing the relation of research risks and benefits was reported   Neither risks to subjects nor their minimization was discussed   The rationale for dose selection at 1/ 40 the animal dose was not reported   Neither societal benefits nor their relation to subject risks is discussed Amitraz 84 " Framework"  3 5. Independent Ethics Review   No mention of ethics oversight or independent review   No standard of ethical conduct cited 6. Informed Consent   " Two healthy adult human males volunteered to participate in the experiment and consented to the administration of the radio active dose." Amitraz 84 " Framework"  4 7. Respect for Subjects   Subject confidentiality was not compromised in the report.

  No mention was made of whether they were free to withdraw.

  The failure to monitor subjects until pulse and blood pressure returned to normal, and the disturbing report of adverse effects persisting beyond the period of observation, suggest less than full commitment to the welfare of the subjects. Amitraz 84 Prevailing Standard ° Research conducted in UK in 1984 ° No standard of ethical conduct cited ° Declaration of Helsinki ( 1983) assumed to have prevailed Comparison to DoH ° Basic Principle # 2: " The design and performance of each experimental procedure involving human subjects should be clearly formulated in an experimental protocol which should be transmitted to a specially appointed independent committee for consideration,

comment and guidance."

° EPA Comment: The protocol is not available.

There is no indication that it was transmitted to a specially appointed independent committee for review. Comparison to DoH  2 ° Basic Principle # 3: " The responsibility for the human subject must always rest with a medically qualified person and never rest on the subject of the research, even though the subject has given his or her consent."

° EPA Comment: The investigators' failure to extend the period of observation until all signs of effects had returned to normal, and their report of effects which persisted beyond the period of observation, suggest that responsibility was inappropriately placed on the subjects to monitor and report effects. Comparison to DoH  3 ° Basic Principle # 5: " Every . . . project . . .

should be preceded by careful assessment of predictable risks in comparison with foreseeable benefits to the subject or to others."

° EPA Comment: If a careful assessment was conducted it was not reported. Comparison to DoH  4 ° Basic Principle # 9: ". . . Each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, anticipated benefits and potential hazards of the study and the discomfort it may entail. He or she should be informed that he or she is at liberty to abstain from participation in the study and that he or she is free to withdraw his or her consent to participation at any time. The physician should then obtain the subject's freely given informed consent, preferably in writing."

° EPA Comment: The study reports that the subjects volunteered and consented to receive the radio labeled dose, but is silent with respect to what they were told Comparison to DoH  5 ° Basic Principle # 12: " The research protocol should always contain a statement of the ethical considerations involved and should indicate that the principles enunciated in the present Declaration are complied with."

° EPA Comment: No protocol was included in the report. Neither the Declaration nor any other standard was cited, nor was there any discussion of ethical considerations Amitraz 84 Summary ° There are many gaps in the record, but gaps are not " clear and convincing evidence".

° There is no evidence that the research was fundamentally unethical.

° Some deficiencies are apparent relative to the cited 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.

° We welcome the Board's advice on the significance of those deficiencies.


National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology ( NACEPT) Superfund Subcommittee Meeting; Notification of Public Advisory NACEPT Subcommittee on Superfund; Open Meeting [ Federal Register: August 14, 2003 ( Volume 68, Number 157)] [ Notices] [ Page 48607] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [ wais. access. gpo. gov] [ DOCID: fr14au03 45]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL 7544 4]

National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology ( NACEPT) Superfund Subcommittee Meeting; Notification of Public Advisory NACEPT Subcommittee on Superfund; Open Meeting AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92 463, notice is hereby given that the Superfund Subcommittee, a subcommittee of the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology ( NACEPT), will meet on the dates and times described below. The meeting is open to the public. Seating will be on a firstcome basis and limited time will be provided for public comment on each day.

DATES: The meeting will be held from 1 p. m. to 7 p. m. on September 3, 2003; from 8 a. m. to 7 p. m. on September 4, 2003; and 8 a. m. to 12: 30 p. m. on September 5, 2003.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place at the Wyndham City Center Hotel, 1143 New Hampshire Avenue, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angelo Carasea, Designated Federal Officer for the NACEPT Superfund Subcommittee, Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, MC 5204G, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC, ( 703) 603 8828. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Agenda This sixth meeting of the NACEPT Superfund Subcommittee will involve discussion of the latest version of the Subcommittee's draft report. The agenda for the meeting will be available one week prior to the meeting's occurrence.

Public Attendance The public is welcome to attend all portions of the meeting. Members of the public who plan to file written statements and/ or make brief ( suggested 5 minute limit) oral statements at the public sessions are encouraged to contact the Designated Federal Official. Each day will have one public comment period.

Angelo Carasea, Designated Federal Officer, NACEPT Superfund Subcommittee. [ FR Doc. 03 20780 Filed 8 13 03; 8: 45 am]