[Federal Register: July 30, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 145)]
[Notices]
[Page 38075-38077]
[DOCID:fr30jy09-109]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60371; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2009-070]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Amend NASDAQ Rule 4751 To Provide System Functionality That Will
Cancel Any Portion of Most Types of Unpriced Orders

July 23, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on July 20, 2009, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (the ``NASDAQ Exchange'')
\3\ filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which
Items have been prepared by the NASDAQ Exchange. The NASDAQ Exchange
has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a non-
controversial rule change under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act,\4\
which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ The Commission notes that The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC refers
to itself in a variety of ways throughout this notice.
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The NASDAQ Exchange is proposing a rule change with the Securities
and Exchange Commission [sic] to amend NASDAQ Rule 4751 to provide
system functionality that will cancel any portion of most types of
unpriced orders (also known as market orders) submitted to the Exchange
that would execute at a price that is more than $0.25 or 5 percent
worse than the national best bid and offer at the time the order
initially reaches the Exchange, whichever is greater. This would apply
both to orders executing on NASDAQ and the portion of any order routed
to another market center.
    (a) The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new
language is underlined; deletions are bracketed.[sic] \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Changes are marked to the rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market
LLC found at http://nasdaqomx.cchwallstreet.com/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

Rule 4751. Definitions

    (a)-(e) No change.
    (f)(1)-(11) No change.
    (12) ``Unpriced Orders'' are any order types permitted by the
System to buy or sell shares of a security at the national best bid
(best offer) (``NBBO'') at the time when the order reaches the System.
    (13) ``Collared Orders'' are all Unpriced Orders except: (1) Market
On Open Orders as defined in Rule 4752; (2) Market On Close Orders as
defined in Rule 4754; (3) Unpriced Orders included by the System in any
Nasdaq Halt Cross or Nasdaq Imbalance Cross, each as defined in Rule
4753; or (4) Unpriced Orders that are Reference Price Cross Orders as
defined in Rule 4770. Any portion of a Collared Order that would
execute (either on NASDAQ or when routed to another market center) at a
price more than $0.25 or 5 percent worse than the NBBO at the time when
the order reaches the System, whichever is greater, will be cancelled.
    (g)-(i) No change.
* * * * *

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to protect market
participants by reducing the risk that unpriced orders, also known as
market orders, will execute at prices that are significantly worse than
the national best bid and offer (``NBBO'') at the time the Exchange
receives the order. NASDAQ believes that most market participants
expect that their order will be executed at its full size at a price
reasonably related to the prevailing market. However, participants may
not be aware that there is insufficient liquidity at or near the NBBO
to fill the entire order, particularly for more thinly-traded
securities. These unpriced orders can disrupt both on [sic] NASDAQ and
other markets to which all or a portion of these orders are routed.
    NASDAQ is proposing to implement new functionality in its trading
and routing systems that would cancel any portion of most unpriced
orders that would execute either on NASDAQ or when routed to another
market center at a price that is the greater of $0.25 or 5 percent
worse than the NBBO at the time NASDAQ receives the order. Unpriced
orders that would be subject to this calculation and potential
cancellation are defined as ``Collared Orders.''
    The following example illustrates how the Collared Order process
would work. A market participant submits a SCAN Order (routable order)
to buy 500 shares.\6\ A SCAN order executes within NASDAQ to the extent
liquidity is available at the NBBO and then routes to other market
centers. The NBBO is $6.00 bid by $6.05 offer, with 100 shares
available on each side. Both sides of the NBBO are set by another
market center (``Away Market''), but NASDAQ has 100 shares available at
the $6.05 to sell at the offer price and also has reserve orders to
sell 100 shares at $6.32 and 400 shares at $6.40. No other market
center is publishing offers to sell the security in between $6.05 and
$6.40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ If the order were a NASDAQ-only unpriced order that is not
eligible for routing, NASDAQ would execute against the liquidity
available on NASDAQ up to the Collared Order thresholds and cancel
the remainder of the order, provided, however, that a NASDAQ-only
order will never trade through a protected quote on another market
center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this example, the Collared Order would be executed in the
following manner:

     100 shares would be executed by NASDAQ at the $6.05;
     400 shares would be routed to the Away Market as an
immediate or cancel order with a price of $6.05;
     100 shares executed by the Away Market; \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This assumes that the Away Market's offer was still
available and that the Away Market had no additional non-displayed
orders at this price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     300 shares returned to NASDAQ;
     100 shares executed by NASDAQ at $6.32 (more than $0.25
but less than 5 percent worse than the NBBO); and
     200 shares, representing the remainder of the Collared
Order, would be cancelled because the remaining liquidity available at
$6.40 is more than 5 percent worse than the NBBO.
    The following unpriced orders would be excluded from the definition
of Collared Orders:
     Market On Open Orders that are included in the NASDAQ
Opening Cross;
     Market On Close Orders that are included in the NASDAQ
Closing Cross;
     Unpriced orders that are included in NASDAQ Halt and
Imbalance Crosses; \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Halt Cross is used to resume trading in stocks that have
been halted, such as in cases of regulatory halts, and for the
release of initial public offerings for trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Unpriced orders that meet the definition of Reference
Price Cross Orders for purposes of the NASDAQ Crossing Network.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Crossing Network occurs at four scheduled times during
the trading day for orders designated for the network.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ proposes to exclude these unpriced orders because in each
case the crossing mechanism is designed to lessen or eliminate the
impact that an individual unpriced order may have on price discovery.
For example, the Crossing Network is designed to execute as many shares
as can be paired at the midpoint of the NBBO at the time the cross is
timed to occur. Therefore, an unpriced order in the Crossing Network,
which can never itself impact the NBBO, would not affect the price at
which the trades occur. Any portion of the unpriced order that was not
executed in the Crossing Network would be cancelled or carried forward
to the next Crossing Network if so instructed.
    With respect to the Opening Crosses, Closing Crosses and Halt
Crosses, the crosses are designed to aggregate orders input into the
cross and to execute the most orders that can be matched at a single
price. In addition, NASDAQ displays to the market both the size of any
order imbalances and the likely price at which the cross will execute.
This transparency incentivizes firms to enter orders on the opposite
side of a large imbalance, causing the execution price to move closer
to the prior market price for the security. This process mitigates the
impact of a large unpriced order. NASDAQ also notes that orders entered
into crosses are not immediately executed, unlike unpriced orders in
the continuous market. In many cases this gives a participant time to
cancel an order before the crossing process begins.
    NASDAQ believes that market participants who wish to trade at
prices further away from the NBBO than the Collared Order thresholds
would permit, may still accomplish their strategy by submitting a
marketable limit order to NASDAQ. In the example above, a market
participant with such a strategy could have input a limit order with a
price of $7.00, which would have executed up to its full size, either
on NASDAQ or on other market centers if the order was routable.
    NASDAQ's proposal is similar to a rule change recently implemented
by BATS Exchange, Inc.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59258 (Jan. 15,
2009), 74 FR 4788 (Jan. 27, 2009) (SR-BATS-2009-001) (Amendment to
BATS Rule 11.9, entitled ``Orders and Modifiers''). NASDAQ's
proposed thresholds of the greater of $0.25 or 5 percent are tighter
than the BATS thresholds of the greater of $0.50 or 5 percent.
NASDAQ believes the tighter thresholds may reduce the impact of
unpriced orders at lower prices, where $0.50 constitutes a
comparatively large percentage move.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \12\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by avoiding execution of unpriced orders (either on NASDAQ or
on other market centers as a result of orders routed by NASDAQ) at
prices that are significantly worse than the NBBO at the time the order
is initially received by NASDAQ. NASDAQ believes that the NBBO provides
reasonable guidance of the current value of a given security and
therefore that market participants should have confidence that their
unpriced orders will not be executed at a significantly worse price
than the NBBO. NASDAQ also believes that this proposal is similar to
thresholds for market orders recently implemented by BATS Exchange,
Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The NASDAQ Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change
will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited
nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    NASDAQ has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative
delay set forth in Rule 19b-4(f)(6). The Commission notes (i) the
proposal is similar to existing thresholds on market orders adopted by
the BATS Exchange, Inc.; (ii) it presents no novel issues; and (iii)
the functionality is voluntary, and it may provide a benefit to market
participants. For these reasons, the Commission believes it is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest to
waive the 30-day operative delay, and hereby grants such waiver.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,

including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-070 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-070. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room on official
business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of Nasdaq. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2009-070 and should be submitted on or before
August 20, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18164 Filed 7-29-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: February 19, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 33)]
[Notices]
[Page 7473-7474]
[DOCID:fr19fe10-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL10-39-000]

SunZia Transmission, LLC; Notice of Filing

February 5, 2010.
    Take notice that on January 29, 2010, SunZia Transmission, LLC
(SunZia) filed a petition for declaratory order pursuant to Rule
207(a)(2) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR
385.207(a)(2) (2009), requesting that the Commission declare that: (i)
Each investor in SunZia may be allocated firm transmission rights
representing 100% of the sponsor's pro rata investment in the
transmission capacity of the SunZia Southwest Transmission Project;
(ii) three sponsors of the project, South Western Power Group (SWPG),
ECP SunZia, LLC (ECP), and Shell WindEnergy Inc. (SWE), each an owner
of membership interest in SunZia, may use up to 100% of their pro rata
share of capacity on the project to serve affiliated generators; and
(iii) SWPG and ECP SunZia may prescribe up to 100% of their 80% pro
rata share of the project transmission capacity through long-term firm
negotiated rate contracts.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the

Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a
document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any
FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on February 19, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-3104 Filed 2-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Exhibit A. 6 Responses for the ICR Approval Period Year by Year by Activity Facilities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Initial Permitting Start up Activities 8 11 10 10 Permit Application Activities 8 11 10 10 Source Waterbody Flow Information 8 11 10 10 Use Existing Data Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data 8 11 10 10 CWIS Flow Reduction Requirements ( Track 1) 5 9 8 7 CWIS Velocity Requirements ( Track 1) 5 9 8 7 Design and Construction Technology Plan ( Track 1) 5 9 8 7 Comprehensive Demonstration Study Plan ( Track 2) 3 2 2 2 Freshwater Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) 5 4 4 4 Estuary Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) 2 1 1 1 Profile of Source Water Biota for Characterization Study ( Track 2) 3 2 2 2 Submit Characterization Study ( Track 2) 4 2 3 3 Freshwater Evaluation of Potential CWIS Effects ( Track 2) 3 2 2 2 Estuary Evaluation of Potential CWIS Effects ( Track 2) 1 0 1 1 Verification Monitoring Plan ( Track 2) 3 2 2 2 NPDES Repermitting Activities 0 0 0 0 Start up Activities 1 4 2 2 Permit Application Activities 1 4 2 2 Source Waterbody Flow Information 1 4 2 2 Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data 1 4 2 2 CWIS Flow Reduction Requirements ( Track 1) 0 0 1 0 CWIS Velocity Requirements ( Track 1) 0 0 1 0 Design and Construction Technology Plan ( Track 1) 0 0 1 0 Comprehensive Demonstration Study Plan ( Track 2) 1 4 1 2 Freshwater Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) 0 3 4 2 Estuary Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) 1 2 2 2 Profile of Source Water Biota for Characterization Study ( Track 2) 1 4 1 2 Submit Characterization Study ( Track 2) 0 0 4 1 52 Annual 0 0 0 0 Freshwater Verification Study ( Track 2) 4 2 0 2 Estuary Verification Study ( Track 2) 2 0 1 1 Biological Monitoring for Impingement ( Freshwater) 9 16 26 17 Biological Monitoring for Impingement ( Estuary) 3 5 6 5 Biological Monitoring for Entrainment ( Freshwater) 9 16 26 17 Biological Monitoring for Entrainment ( Estuary) 3 5 6 5 Velocity Monitoring 12 21 32 22 Visual Inspection of Installed Technologies 9 13 15 12 Yearly Status Report Activities 12 21 32 22 Responses 141 214 248 201 Directors Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Director Permit Issuance Activities Reviewing Facility General Permit Application Information 8 11 10 10 Review Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data 8 11 10 10 Determine Compliance with Source Waterbody Flow Information 8 11 10 10 Review Design and Construction Technology Plan ( Track 1) 5 9 8 7 Determine Compliance with CWIS Velocity Requirements ( Track 1) 5 9 8 7 Determine Compliance with CWIS Flow Reduction Requirements ( Track 1) 5 9 8 7 Review Comprehensive Demonstration Study Plan ( Track 2) 3 2 2 2 Review Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) 4 2 3 3 Review Evaluation of Potential CWIS Effects ( Track 2) 4 2 3 3 Determining Facility Requirements and Issuing Permit 9 11 11 10 Verification Study Review 6 2 1 3 Director Permit Reissuance Activities Reviewing Facility General Permit Application Information 1 4 2 2 Review Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data 1 4 2 2 Determine Compliance with Source Waterbody Flow Information 1 4 2 2 Review Design and Construction Technology Plan ( Track 1) 0 0 1 0 Determine Compliance with CWIS Velocity Requirements ( Track 1) 0 0 1 0 Determine Compliance with CWIS Flow Reduction Requirements ( Track 1) 0 0 1 0 Review Comprehensive Demonstration Study Plan ( Track 2) 1 4 1 2 Review Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) 0 0 4 1 Determining Facility Requirements and Issuing Permit 0 0 5 2 Annual Director Activities Review of Yearly Report 12 21 32 22 Compliance Tracking 12 21 32 22 Determination on Monitoring Scope Reduction 12 21 32 22 Record Keeping 12 21 32 22 Responses 117 179 221 172 53 Sum for Facilities and Directors Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Facilities 141 214 248 201 Directors 117 179 221 172 Yearly Total* 258 393 469 373 54 Exhibit A. 7 Hourly Burden for the ICR Approval Period Year by Year for Facilities Facility Activities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source ( Exhibit) Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annua l Avera ge NPDES Permit Application Activities Start up Activities A1a 344 473 430 416 Permit Application Activities A1b 1,168 1,606 1,460 1,411 Source Waterbody Flow Information A1c 832 1,144 1,040 1,005 Use Existing Data Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data A1d 2,120 2,915 2,650 2,562 CWIS Flow Reduction Requirements ( Track 1) A1e 540 972 864 792 CWIS Velocity Requirements ( Track 1) A1f 690 1,242 1,104 1,012 Design and Construction Technology Plan ( Track 1) A1g 540 972 864 792 Comprehensive Demonstration Study Plan ( Track 2) A1h 813 542 542 632 Freshwater Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) A1i 11,098 8,878 8,878 9,618 Estuary Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) A1i 5,689 2,844 2,844 3,792 Profile of Source Water Biota for Characterization Study ( Track 2) A1i 1,119 746 746 870 Submit Characterization Study ( Track 2) A1i 1,536 768 1,152 1,152 Freshwater Evaluation of Potential CWIS Effects ( Track 2) A1j 4,878 3,252 3,252 3,794 Estuary Evaluation of Potential CWIS Effects ( Track 2) A1j 1,950 0 1,950 1,300 Verification Monitoring Plan ( Track 2) A1k 384 256 256 299 NPDES Permit Application Activity Total 31,366 26,354 25,826 27,849 NPDES Repermitting Activities Start up Activities A12a 13 52 26 30 Permit Application Activities A12b 72 288 144 168 Source Waterbody Flow Information A12c 31 124 62 72 Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data A12d 79 316 158 184 CWIS Flow Reduction Requirements ( Track 1) A12e 0 0 108 36 CWIS Velocity Requirements ( Track 1) A12f 0 0 75 25 Design and Construction Technology Plan ( Track 1) A12g 0 0 43 14 Comprehensive Demonstration Study Plan ( Track 2) A12h 80 320 80 160 Freshwater Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) A12i 0 3,870 5,160 3,010 Estuary Source Water Baseline Biological A12i 1,665 3,329 3,329 2,774 55 Characterization Study ( Track 2) Profile of Source Water Biota for Characterization Study ( Track 2) A12i 113 452 113 226 Submit Characterization Study ( Track 2) A12i 0 0 460 153 NPDES Repermitting Activity Total 2,053 8,751 9,758 6,854 Annual Activities Freshwater Verification Study ( Track 2) A2a 368 184 0 184 Estuary Verification Study ( Track 2) A2b 244 0 122 122 Biological Monitoring for Impingement ( Freshwater) A2c 3,411 6,064 9,854 6,443 Biological Monitoring for Impingement ( Estuary) A2d 1,445 2,408 2,890 2,247 Biological Monitoring for Entrainment ( Freshwater) A2e 5,526 9,824 15,964 10,438 Biological Monitoring for Entrainment ( Estuary) A2f 2,328 3,880 4,656 3,621 Velocity Monitoring A2g 1,956 3,423 5,216 3,532 Visual Inspection of Installed Technologies A2h 2,277 3,289 3,795 3,120 Yearly Status Report Activities A2i 4,176 7,308 11,136 7,540 Annual Activity Yearly Labor Total 21,119 36,196 53,511 36,942 Yearly Labor Total 54,538 71,302 89,095 71,645 56 Exhibit A. 8 Hourly Burden for the ICR Approval Period Year by Year for Directors and Federal Government Director Activities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source ( Exhibit) Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Director Permit Issuance Activities A3a 3,420 2,984 3,338 3,247 Verification Study Review A3b 126 42 21 63 Director Permit Reissuance Activities A13 31 124 534 230 Annual Director Activities A3c 600 1,050 1,600 1,083 Yearly Total 4,177 4,200 5,493 4,623 Federal Activities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source ( Exhibit) Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Federal Permit Program Oversight Activities A4a 295 336 337 323 Yearly Total 295 336 337 323 57 Exhibit A. 9 Costs for the ICR Approval Period Year by Year for Facilities Facility Activities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source ( Exhibit) Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average NPDES Permit Application Activities Start up Activities A1a $ 17,889 $ 24,597 $ 22,361 $ 21,616 Permit Application Activities A1b $ 47,221 $ 64,929 $ 59,026 $ 57,058 Source Waterbody Flow Information A1c $ 29,510 $ 40,577 $ 36,888 $ 35,658 Use Existing Data Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data A1d $ 96,686 $ 132,943 $ 120,857 $ 116,828 CWIS Flow Reduction Requirements ( Track 1) A1e $ 20,552 $ 36,994 $ 32,883 $ 30,143 CWIS Velocity Requirements ( Track 1) A1f $ 29,049 $ 52,288 $ 46,478 $ 42,605 Design and Construction Technology Plan ( Track 1) A1g $ 23,482 $ 42,268 $ 37,571 $ 34,440 Comprehensive Demonstration Study Plan ( Track 2) A1h $ 38,760 $ 25,840 $ 25,840 $ 30,147 Freshwater Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) A1i $ 531,805 $ 425,444 $ 425,444 $ 460,897 Estuary Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) A1i $ 270,418 $ 135,209 $ 135,209 $ 180,278 Profile of Source Water Biota for Characterization Study ( Track 2) A1i $ 68,189 $ 45,459 $ 45,459 $ 53,036 Submit Characterization Study ( Track 2) A1i $ 75,835 $ 37,918 $ 56,876 $ 56,876 Freshwater Evaluation of Potential CWIS Effects ( Track 2) A1j $ 255,253 $ 170,168 $ 170,168 $ 198,530 Estuary Evaluation of Potential CWIS Effects ( Track 2) A1j $ 99,968 $ 0 $ 99,968 $ 66,645 Verification Monitoring Plan ( Track 2) A1k $ 18,742 $ 12,494 $ 12,494 $ 14,577 NPDES Permit Application Activity Total $ 1,623,358 $ 1,247,127 $ 1,327,524 $ 1,399,33 6 NPDES Repermitting Activities Start up Activities A12a $ 715 $ 2,858 $ 1,429 $ 1,667 Permit Application Activities A12b $ 3,097 $ 12,387 $ 6,194 $ 7,226 Source Waterbody Flow Information A12c $ 1,087 $ 4,348 $ 2,174 $ 2,536 Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data A12d $ 3,655 $ 14,620 $ 7,310 $ 8,528 CWIS Flow Reduction Requirements ( Track 1) A12e $ 0 $ 0 $ 4,110 $ 1,370 CWIS Velocity Requirements ( Track 1) A12f $ 0 $ 0 $ 3,124 $ 1,041 Design and Construction Technology Plan ( Track 1) A12g $ 0 $ 0 $ 1,855 $ 618 Comprehensive Demonstration Study Plan ( Track 2) A12h $ 3,775 $ 15,098 $ 3,775 $ 7,549 Freshwater Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) A12i $ 0 $ 183,271 $ 244,361 $ 142,544 Estuary Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) A12i $ 78,495 $ 156,990 $ 156,990 $ 130,825 Profile of Source Water Biota for Characterization Study ( Track 2) A12i $ 6,941 $ 27,765 $ 6,941 $ 13,882 Submit Characterization Study ( Track 2) A12i $ 0 $ 0 $ 22,874 $ 7,625 NPDES Repermitting Activity Total $ 97,764 $ 417,336 $ 461,136 $ 325,412 Annual Activities Freshwater Verification Study ( Track 2) A2a $ 21,207 $ 10,604 $ 0 $ 10,604 Estuary Verification Study ( Track 2) A2b $ 14,193 $ 0 $ 7,096 $ 7,096 Biological Monitoring for Impingement ( Freshwater) A2c $ 171,261 $ 304,464 $ 494,754 $ 323,493 58 Biological Monitoring for Impingement ( Estuary) A2d $ 72,678 $ 121,130 $ 145,356 $ 113,055 Biological Monitoring for Entrainment ( Freshwater) A2e $ 281,171 $ 499,859 $ 812,271 $ 531,100 Biological Monitoring for Entrainment ( Estuary) A2f $ 117,466 $ 195,776 $ 234,931 $ 182,724 Velocity Monitoring A2g $ 73,045 $ 127,829 $ 194,787 $ 131,887 Visual Inspection of Installed Technologies A2h $ 92,510 $ 133,626 $ 154,184 $ 126,773 Yearly Status Report Activities A2i $ 223,733 $ 391,532 $ 596,621 $ 403,962 Annual Activity Yearly Labor Total $ 1,067,263 $ 1,784,820 $ 2,640,000 $ 1,830,69 4 Yearly Labor Total $ 2,788,385$ 3,449,283 $ 4,428,660 $ 3,555,44 3 Facility O& M Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source ( Exhibit) Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average NPDES Application Purchase and Installation of Remote Monitoring Device A. 1k $ 260,369 $ 468,664 $ 416,590 $ 381,874 Purchase & Installation of Pilot Study Technology A. 1j $ 1,024,943 $ 512,472 $ 768,707 $ 768,707 Operation & Maintenance of Pilot Technology A. 1j $ 120,000 $ 60,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 Biological Study Laboratory Analysis ( Freshwater) A. 1i $ 195,000 $ 156,000 $ 156,000 $ 169,000 Biological Study Laboratory Analysis ( Estuary) A. 1i $ 131,820 $ 65,910 $ 65,910 $ 87,880 Pilot Study Entrainment Laboratory Analysis ( Freshwater) A. 1j $ 18,000 $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ 14,000 Pilot Study Entrainment Laboratory Analysis ( Estuary) A. 1j $ 7,800 $ 0 $ 7,800 $ 5,200 Other Direct Costs A. 1a k $ 52,567 $ 56,483 $ 53,633 $ 54,228 Repermitting Biological Study Laboratory Analysis ( Freshwater) A. 12i $ 0 $ 70,200 $ 93,600 $ 54,600 Biological Study Laboratory Analysis ( Estuary) A. 12i $ 39,546 $ 79,092 $ 79,092 $ 65,910 Other Direct Costs A. 12a i $ 4,750 $ 18,480 $ 16,440 $ 13,223 Annual Operation of Remote Sensing Device A. 2f $ 600 $ 1,600 $ 3,400 $ 1,867 Identify & Enumerate Entrained Freshwater Biota A. 2f $ 70,200 $ 124,800 $ 202,800 $ 132,600 Identify & Enumerate Entrained Estuary Biota A. 2f $ 30,420 $ 50,700 $ 60,840 $ 47,320 Other Direct Costs A. 2a f $ 33,150 $ 53,550 $ 79,850 $ 55,517 Equipment Capital Cost Subtotal $ 1,285,912 $ 982,735 $ 1,188,697 $ 1,152,44 8 Equipment O& M Cost Subtotal $ 120,000 $ 60,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 Laboratory Analysis Subtotal $ 492,786 $ 558,702 $ 678,042 $ 576,510 Other Direct Costs Subtotal $ 90,467 $ 128,513 $ 149,923 $ 122,968 Yearly O& M Total $ 1,989,165$ 1,729,951 $ 2,106,663 $ 1,941,92 6 59 Exhibit A. 10 Costs for the ICR Approval Period Year by Year for Directors and Federal Government Director Activities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source ( Exhibit) Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Director Permit Issuance Activities A3a $ 172,356 $ 143,062 $ 163,807 $ 159,742 Verification Study Review A3b $ 5,083 $ 1,694 $ 847 $ 2,542 Director Permit Reissuance Activities A13 $ 1,380 $ 5,520 $ 27,721 $ 11,541 Annual Director Activities A3c $ 24,583 $ 43,021 $ 65,555 $ 44,386 Yearly Total $ 203,403 $ 193,298 $ 257,930 $ 218,210 Director O& M ( Other Direct Costs)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source ( Exhibit) Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Start Up & NPDES Application Other Direct Costs A3a b $ 3,000 $ 3,400 $ 3,350 $ 3,250 Annual Other Direct Costs A3c $ 600 $ 1,050 $ 1,600 $ 1,083 Yearly O& M Cost Total $ 3,600 $ 4,450 $ 4,950 $ 4,333 Federal Labor Activities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source ( Exhibit) Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Federal Permit Program Oversight Activities A4b 11,955 13,546 13,604 $ 13,035 Yearly Total $ 11,955 $ 13,546 $ 13,604 $ 13,035 Federal O& M ( Other Direct Costs)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Source ( Exhibit) Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Federal Permit Program Oversight ODCs A4a $ 450 $ 550 $ 550 $ 517 Yearly Total $ 450 $ 550 $ 550 $ 517 60 Exhibit A. 11 Summary of the Burden, Respondents, Responses, and Costs for the ICR Approval Period by Year and Annual Averages Facilities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Three Year Total Source ( Exhibit)* Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Burden ( hours) A7 54,538 71,302 89,095 71,645 214,935 Respondents ( number) A5 21 36 46 34 45 Responses ( number) A6 141 214 248 201 603 Costs ( labor) A9 $ 2,788,385 $ 3,449,283 $ 4,428,660 $ 3,555,443 $ 10,666,328 Costs ( capital) A9 $ 1,285,912 $ 982,735 $ 1,188,697 $ 1,152,448 $ 3,457,345 Costs ( equipment O& M) A9 $ 120,000 $ 60,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 270,000 Costs ( lab analysis) A9 $ 492,786 $ 558,702 $ 678,042 $ 576,510 $ 1,729,530 Costs ( other direct costs) A9 $ 90,467 $ 128,513 $ 149,923 $ 122,968 $ 368,903 Total Costs $ 4,777,550 $ 5,179,234 $ 6,535,323 $ 5,497,369 $ 16,492,106 Directors Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Three Year Total Source ( Exhibit)* Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Burden ( hours) A8 4,177 4,200 5,493 4,623 13,870 61 Respondents ( number) A5 22 36 46 35 46 Responses ( number) A6 117 179 221 172 517 Costs( labor) A10 $ 203,403 $ 193,298 $ 257,930 $ 218,210 $ 654,631 Costs ( other direct costs) A10

Total Costs $ 203,403 $ 193,298 $ 257,930 $ 218,210 $ 654,631 Federal Government Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Three Year Total Source ( Exhibit) Dec. 2004  Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005  Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006  Nov. 2007 Annual Average Burden ( hours) A8 295 336 337 323 968 Costs( labor) A10 $ 11,955 $ 13,546 $ 13,604 $ 13,035 $ 39,104 Costs ( other direct costs) A10

Total Costs $ 11,955 $ 13,546 $ 13,604 $ 13,035 $ 39,104 Totals for Respondents ( Facilities and Directors)* Annual Average Three Year Total Total Respondent Burden ( hours) 76,268 228,805 Total Respondents ( number) 69 91 Total Respondent Labor Costs $ 3,773,653 $ 11,320,959 Total Respondent Capital and O& M Costs $ 1,941,926 $ 5,555,778 Total Respondent Cost for All Activities $ 5,715,579 $ 17,146,737 * Totals for annual averages may not match exactly due to rounding discrepancies 62 Exhibit A. 12 Facility Cost and Burden Estimates for NPDES Permit Renewal Activities Exhibit A. 12a Start up Activities Facilities ( Responde nts) Facili ty Mana ger Junior Techni cal CAD Operat or Contra cted Manag er Biolo gist Statistic ian Biolog ical Techni cian Cleri cal Totals Per Facility for the ICR Approval Period Total Burden ( hrs.) Total Initial Cost Assumed Loaded Hourly Rate $ Burde n ( hrs) Labor Cost Capital Costs O& M Costs Total Costs**

Ye ar 1 Y e a r 2 Y e a r 3 Tot al $ 77 $ 37 $ 33 $ 92 $ 55 $ 63 $ 39 $ 19 Capital Costs Activity A Level of Effort ( hrs) B C D E C+ D+ E A* B A*( C+ D)

Read and Understand Rule 1 4 2 7 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 $ 452 $ 0 $ 0 56 $ 3,164 Mobilization/ Planning 1 4 2 7 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 $ 150 $ 0 $ 0 21 $ 1,047 Training 1 4 2 7 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 $ 113 $ 0 $ 0 14 $ 791 Other Direct Costs 1 4 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 50  $ 350 Totals 1 4 2 7 13 $ 715 $ 0 $ 50 $ 765 91 $ 5,352 Exhibit A. 12b Permit Application Activities Facilities ( Responde nts) Facili ty Mana ger Junior Techni cal CAD Operat or Contra cted Manag er Biolo gist Statistic ian Biolog ical Techni cian Cleri cal Totals Per Facility for the ICR Approval Period Total Burden ( hrs.) Total Initial Cost Assumed Loaded Hourly Rate $ Burde n ( hrs) Labor Cost Capital Costs O& M Costs Total Costs**

Ye ar Y e Y e Tot al $ 77 $ 37 $ 33 $ 92 $ 55 $ 63 $ 39 $ 19 Capital Costs 63 1 a r 2 a r 3 Activity A Level of Effort ( hrs) B C D E C+ D+ E A* B A*( C+ D)

Detailed Source Water Body Characterization 1 4 2 7 1 5 12 0 0 0 0 0 18 $ 649 $ 0 $ 0 126 $ 4,543 Description of CWIS Configuration and Location 1 4 2 7 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 $ 69 $ 0 $ 0 14 $ 483 Facility Water Balance Diagram 1 4 2 7 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 $ 146 $ 0 $ 0 21 $ 1,019 Operational Characteristics Narrative 1 4 2 7 12 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 $ 2,013 $ 0 $ 0 294 $ 14,091 Submit Materials for Review by State 1 4 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 $ 56 $ 0 $ 0 21 $ 393 Recordkeeping 1 4 2 7 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 4 $ 164 $ 0 $ 0 28 $ 1,149 Other Direct Costs 1 4 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 500  $ 3,500 Totals 1 4 2 7 72 $ 3,097 $ 0 $ 500 $ 3,597 504 $ 25,178 Water balance diagram is assumed to be taken from the facility design report. The hours reported here are for incorporation of the diagram( s) in the permit.

Exhibit A. 12c Source Waterbody Flow Information Facilities ( Responde nts) Facili ty Mana ger Junior Techni cal CAD Operat or Contra cted Manag er Biolo gist Statistic ian Biolog ical Techni cian Cleri cal Totals Per Facility for the ICR Approval Period Total Burden ( hrs.) Total Initial Cost Assumed Loaded Hourly Rate $ Burde n ( hrs) Labor Cost Capital Costs O& M Costs Total Costs**

Ye ar 1 Y e a r 2 Y e a r 3 Tot al $ 77 $ 37 $ 33 $ 92 $ 55 $ 63 $ 39 $ 19 Capital Costs Activity A Level of Effort ( hrs) B C D E C+ D+ E A* B A*( C+ D)

Gather Information Characterizing Flow 1 4 2 7 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 $ 365 $ 0 $ 0 70 $ 2,555 64 Perform Engineering Calculations 1 4 2 7 2 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 $ 518 $ 0 $ 0 84 $ 3,626 Submit Data and Analysis for Review 1 4 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 $ 94 $ 0 $ 0 35 $ 655 Recordkeeping 1 4 2 7 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 $ 110 $ 0 $ 0 28 $ 773 Other Direct Costs 1 4 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 100  $ 700 Totals 1 4 2 7 31 $ 1,087 $ 0 $ 100 $ 1,187 217 $ 8,308 Exhibit A. 12d Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data Facilities ( Responde nts) Facili ty Mana ger Junior Techni cal CAD Operat or Contra cted Manag er Biolo gist Statistic ian Biolog ical Techni cian Cleri cal Totals Per Facility for the ICR Approval Period Total Burden ( hrs.) Total Initial Cost Assumed Loaded Hourly Rate $ Burde n ( hrs) Labor Cost Capital Costs O& M Costs Total Costs**

Ye ar 1 Y e a r 2 Y e a r 3 Tot al $ 77 $ 37 $ 33 $ 92 $ 55 $ 63 $ 39 $ 19 Capital Costs Activity A Level of Effort ( hrs) B C D E C+ D+ E A* B A*( C+ D)

Identify Available Data and Document Efforts 1 4 2 7 12 24 0 0 0 0 0 2 38 $ 1,831 $ 0 $ 0 266 $ 12,820 Compile and Analyze Existing Data 1 4 2 7 10 18 6 0 0 0 0 1 35 $ 1,636 $ 0 $ 0 245 $ 11,450 Submit Data for Review by State 1 4 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 $ 37 $ 0 $ 0 14 $ 262 Recordkeeping 1 4 2 7 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 $ 150 $ 0 $ 0 28 $ 1,053 Other Direct Costs 1 4 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 750  $ 5,250 Totals 1 4 2 7 79 $ 3,655 $ 0 $ 750 $ 4,405 553 $ 30,834 Exhibit A. 12e CWIS Flow Reduction 65 Requirements ( Track 1) Facilities ( Responde nts) Facili ty Mana ger Junior Techni cal CAD Operat or Contra cted Manag er Biolo gist Statistic ian Biolog ical Techni cian Cleri cal Totals Per Facility for the ICR Approval Period Total Burden ( hrs.) Total Initial Cost Assumed Loaded Hourly Rate $ Burde n ( hrs) Labor Cost Capital Costs O& M Costs Total Costs**

Ye ar 1 Y e a r 2 Y e a r 3 Tot al $ 77 $ 37 $ 33 $ 92 $ 55 $ 63 $ 39 $ 19 Capital Costs Activity A Level of Effort ( hrs) B C D E C+ D+ E A* B A*( C+ D)

Develop Narrative 0 0 1 1 8 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 $ 1,196 $ 0 $ 0 24 $ 1,196 Perform Engineering Calculations 0 0 1 1 4 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 $ 744 $ 0 $ 0 16 $ 744 Document Minimization of Blow Down and Flows Not Recycled 0 0 1 1 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 6 46 $ 1,572 $ 0 $ 0 46 $ 1,572 Submit Data and Analysis for Review 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 $ 150 $ 0 $ 0 8 $ 150 Recordkeeping 0 0 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 8 14 $ 449 $ 0 $ 0 14 $ 449 Other Direct Costs 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 400  $ 400 Totals 0 0 1 1 108 $ 4,110 $ 0 $ 400 $ 4,510 108 $ 4,510 Exhibit A. 12f CWIS Velocity Requirements ( Track 1) Facilities ( Responde nts) Facili ty Mana ger Junior Techni cal CAD Operat or Contra cted Manag er Biolo gist Statistic ian Biolog ical Techni cian Cleri cal Totals Per Facility for the ICR Approval Period Total Burden ( hrs.) Total Initial Cost Assumed Loaded Hourly Rate $ Burde n ( hrs) Labor Cost Capital Costs O& M Costs Total Costs**

Ye ar 1 Y e a Y e a Tot al $ 77 $ 37 $ 33 $ 92 $ 55 $ 63 $ 39 $ 19 Capital Costs 66 r 2 r 3 Activity A Level of Effort ( hrs) B C D E C+ D+ E A* B A*( C+ D)

Develop Narrative 0 0 1 1 5 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 $ 748 $ 0 $ 0 15 $ 748 Perform Engineering Calculations 0 0 1 1 8 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 $ 1,780 $ 0 $ 0 40 $ 1,780 Submit Data and Analysis for Review 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 $ 150 $ 0 $ 0 8 $ 150 Revise Based on State review 0 0 1 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 $ 259 $ 0 $ 0 6 $ 259 Recordkeeping 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 $ 188 $ 0 $ 0 6 $ 188 Other Direct Costs 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 1,000  $ 1,000 Totals 0 0 1 1 75 $ 3,124 $ 0 $ 1,000 $ 4,124 75 $ 4,124 Exhibit A. 12g Design and Construction Technology Plan ( Track 1) Facilities ( Responde nts) Facili ty Mana ger Junior Techni cal CAD Operat or Contra cted Manag er Biolo gist Statistic ian Biolog ical Techni cian Cleri cal Totals Per Facility for the ICR Approval Period Total Burden ( hrs.) Total Initial Cost Assumed Loaded Hourly Rate $ Burde n ( hrs) Labor Cost Capital Costs O& M Costs Total Costs**

Ye ar 1 Y e a r 2 Y e a r 3 Tot al $ 77 $ 37 $ 33 $ 92 $ 55 $ 63 $ 39 $ 19 Capital Costs Activity A Level of Effort ( hrs) B C D E C+ D+ E A* B A*( C+ D)

Delineate Hydraulic Zone of Influence 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 $ 215 $ 0 $ 0 5 $ 215 Develop Narrative Description 0 0 1 1 5 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 $ 748 $ 0 $ 0 15 $ 748 Perform Engineering Calculations 0 0 1 1 3 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 $ 668 $ 0 $ 0 15 $ 668 67 Submit Data and Analysis for Review 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 $ 56 $ 0 $ 0 3 $ 56 Recordkeeping 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 $ 169 $ 0 $ 0 5 $ 169 Other Direct Costs 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 50  $ 50 Totals 0 0 1 1 43 $ 1,855 $ 0 $ 50 $ 1,905 43 $ 1,905 Exhibit A. 12h Comprehensive Demonstration Study Plan ( Track 2) Facilities ( Responde nts) Facili ty Mana ger Junior Techni cal CAD Operat or Contra cted Manag er Biolo gist Statistic ian Biolog ical Techni cian Cleri cal Totals Per Facility for the ICR Approval Period Total Burden ( hrs.) Total Initial Cost Assumed Loaded Hourly Rate $ Burde n ( hrs) Labor Cost Capital Costs O& M Costs Total Costs**

Ye ar 1 Y e a r 2 Y e a r 3 Tot al $ 77 $ 37 $ 33 $ 92 $ 55 $ 63 $ 39 $ 19 Capital Costs Activity A Level of Effort ( hrs) B C D E C+ D+ E A* B A*( C+ D)

Description of Historical Studies that will be Used 1 4 1 6 6 12 0 0 0 0 0 1 19 $ 916 $ 0 $ 0 114 $ 5,494 Description of Proposed and/ or Implemented Technologies 1 4 1 6 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 $ 372 $ 0 $ 0 48 $ 2,232 Develop Baseline Biological Characterization Sampling Plan 1 4 1 6 12 18 2 2 0 0 0 1 35 $ 1,843 $ 0 $ 0 210 $ 11,055 Submit Data and Plans for Review 1 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 $ 75 $ 0 $ 0 24 $ 449 Revise Based on State Review 1 4 1 6 2 5 1 0 0 0 0 1 9 $ 387 $ 0 $ 0 54 $ 2,320 Recordkeeping 1 4 1 6 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 5 $ 183 $ 0 $ 0 30 $ 1,097 Other Direct Costs 1 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 750  $ 4,500 Totals 1 4 1 6 80 $ 3,775 $ 0 $ 750 $ 4,525 480 $ 27,148 68 Exhibit A. 12i Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) Facilities ( Responde nts) Facili ty Mana ger Junior Tech CAD Operat or Contra cted Manag er Biolo gist Statistic ian Biolog ical Techni cian Cleri cal Totals Per Facility for the ICR Approval Period Total Burden ( hrs.) Total Initial Cost Assumed Loaded Hourly Rate $ Burde n ( hrs) Labor Cost Capital Costs O& M Costs Total Costs**

Ye ar 1 Y e a r 2 Y e a r 3 Tot al $ 77 $ 37 $ 33 $ 92 $ 55 $ 63 $ 39 $ 19 Capital Costs Activity A Level of Effort ( hrs) B C D E C+ D+ E A* B A*( C+ D)

Implement Freshwater Sampling 0 3 4 4 2 16 0 36 124 8 20 1248 10 2580 $ 122,180 $ 0 0 6,020 $ 427,631 Other Direct Costs for Implement Freshwater Sampling 0 3 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 3,120 $ 10,920 Implement Estuary Sampling 1 2 2 2 3 30 0 48 243 4 30 2434 15 4994 $ 235,485 $ 0 0 8,323 $ 392,475 Other Direct Costs for Implement Estuary Sampling 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 7,800 $ 13,000 Biological Study Laboratory Analysis ( Freshwater) 0 3 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 0 $ 46,800  $ 163,800 Biological Study Laboratory Analysis ( Estuary) 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 0 $ 118,638  $ 197,730 Profile of Source Water Biota 1 4 1 6 10 6 0 10 18 0 6 2 52 $ 3,155 $ 0 $ 0 312 $ 18,932 Identification of Critical Species 1 4 1 6 10 6 0 6 12 0 0 1 35 $ 2,208 $ 0 $ 0 210 $ 13,249 Description of Additional Stresses 1 4 1 6 5 3 0 5 9 0 3 1 26 $ 1,578 $ 0 $ 0 156 $ 9,466 Write Study based on Results and Submit for Review by State 0 0 4 4 24 48 0 5 2 2 0 2 83 $ 4,320 $ 0 $ 0 332 $ 17,280 Recordkeeping 0 0 4 4 2 4 0 2 0 0 0 7 15 $ 614 $ 0 $ 0 60 $ 2,455 Finalize study based on State review 0 0 4 4 5 10 0 0 0 0 0 2 17 $ 785 $ 0 $ 0 68 $ 3,140 69 Freshwater Totals 4 2,808 $ 134,840 $ 46,800 $ 3,120 $ 184,760 $ 7,503 $ 647,272 Marine Totals 2 5,222 $ 248,145 $ 118,638 $ 7,800 $ 374,583 8,666 $ 622,806 Average Labor Burden and Costs for All NPDES Application Activities Facilities ( Respondents) Avera ge Burde n Per Facilit y Average Facility Labor $ Average Capital $ Average O& M $ Average Facility Cost $

Ye ar 1 Y e a r 2 Y e a r 3 Total Track 1 Freshwater 421 $ 17,642 $ 0 $ 2,850 $ 20,492 Track 1 Estuary 421 $ 17,642 $ 0 $ 2,850 $ 20,492 Track 2 Freshwater 3083 $ 147,168 $ 46,800 $ 5,270 $ 199,238 Track 2 Estuary 5497 $ 260,473 $ 118,638 $ 9,950 $ 389,061 Total Burden and Costs for All NPDES Application Activities Total Burden ( hrs.) Total Initial Cost Totals 18,240 $ 1,377,436 * The ODC estimate was not estimated for each activity, but rather as a lump sum for each provision of the rule. 70 Exhibit A. 13 Director Burden and Cost Estimates for Permit Renewal Exhibit A. 13 Director Permit Reissuance Activities Senior Technical Junior Technical Clerical Burden Per Permit Labor Cost per Permit ODCs lump sum* Total Cost Per Permit Assumed Loaded Hourly Rate $

59 34 24 Activity Level of Effort ( hrs) B C D C+ D Reviewing CWIS location and design data 2 5 0 7 $ 287 Determine Compliance with Source Waterbody Flow Information 1 2 0 2 $ 96 Review Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data 6 6 0 12 $ 554 Review Design and Construction Technology Plan ( Track 1) 7 2 0 10 $ 503 Determine Compliance with CWIS Velocity Requirements ( Track 1) 1 2 0 2 $ 96 Determine Compliance with CWIS Flow Reduction Requirements ( Track 1) 2 2 0 5 $ 222 Review Comprehensive Demonstration Study Plan ( Track 2) 5 5 0 10 $ 443 Review Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Study ( Track 2) 80 15 0 95 $ 5,194 Determine Monitoring Frequency 1 2 0 2 $ 96 Determine Record keeping and Reporting Frequency 1 2 0 2 $ 96 Considering Public Comments 5 5 0 10 $ 443 Issuing Permit 0 2 0 2 $ 85 Permit Record Keeping 0 0 1 1 $ 42 Totals 110 50 1 160 $ 8,156 $ 300 $ 8,456 71 ASSUMPTIONS Respondents and Compliance Schedule Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 8 Facility # 5 2 2 3 9 11 11 8 7 6 9 6 6 6 5 6 4 5 RCFreshwater 1 0 0 2 4 8 7 5 6 4 4 5 3 4 4 5 2 3 RC Estuary 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 OTFreshwater 3 1 2 0 3 2 2 2 1 1 4 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 OT Estuary 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 yr total 9 Total Assumption States 56 3 number of years required for Track 2 Sourcewater Biological Characterization Study NPDES Auth. 46 0 0 0 Labor Assumptions Facility Contracted Company State Labor Categories* Facility Manag e ment Junior Techni cal CAD Operat or Contra c ted Manag er Biologi st Biologic al Technici an Statistici an Clerical Labor Categories** Senior Techni cal Junior Techni cal Clerical Labor Rates $/ hr $ 41.58 $ 19.85 $ 17.68 $ 39.54 $ 23.74 $ 16.98 $ 27.44 $ 10.71 Labor Rates $/ hr $ 36.01 $ 20.92 $ 12.91 Compensation Factor*** 1.535 1.535 1.535 1.3566 1.3566 1.3566 1.3566 1.3456 Compensation Factor 1.389 1.373 1.565 Indirect Costs( overhead) 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.15 Indirect Cost( Overhead) 1.15 1.15 1.15 72 Fee 1 1 1 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 Inflation Factors**** 1.042 1.042 1.042 1.057 1.044 1.044 1.044 1.045 1.018 1.02 1.023 Loaded Rate $/ hr/ 01 $ 76.50 $ 36.50 $ 32.50 $ 91.90 $ 54.50 $ 39.00 $ 63.00 $ 18.70 Loaded Rate $/ hr/ 01 $ 59 $ 34 $ 24 * All labor rates are from the BLS Occupational Outlook Handbook 2004 2005 http:// stats. bls. gov/ ocohome. htm ** All labor rates and compensation factors are from the BLS Employment Cost Trends, as of March 2001.

http:// stats. bls. gov/ news. release/ ecec. t04. htm *** Compensation factors are from the BLS Employment Cost Trends Tables 4 and 10 reflect June 2004, as of September 2004. http:// stats. bls. gov/ news. release/ ecec. t04. htm & http:// stats. bls. gov/ news. release/ ecec. t10. htm **** Inflation Factors Labor ratesw from BLS Occupational Handbook were adjusted for inflation using the Employment Cost Index ( ECI)

http:// data. bls. gov/ labjava/ outside. jsp? survey=

ec 73 Employment Wage and Salary Indexes Dec 02 Jun 04 Private Industry 1.057 Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations 1.044 Professional, specialty, and technical occupations 1.045 Administrative support, including clerical, occupations 1.042 Manufacturing; White collar occupations, excluding sales occupations Jun 03 Jun 04 State and Local Government 1.018 Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations 1.02 Professional, specialty, and technical occupations 1.023 Administrative support, including clerical, occupations For the adjustment of Remote Monitoring Device and Pilot Study Technology from 1999 to June 2004 ODC Inflation Factor 1998 8/ 1/ 200 4 2001 8/ 1/ 04 CPI Seasonally Adjusted 130.2 135.6 132.3 135.6 Item : Commodities items less food and beverages 4.15% 2.49% Appendix B NAICS and SIC Codes for Nonutility Power Producers 73 Steam Electric Nonindustrial Nonutility Power Producers1 This industrial sector contains various reported NAICS and SIC codes2. The following table documents the specific industry sectors covered and their associated NAICS and SIC code.

3 to 6 Digit NAICS Code 2 Digit SIC Code 3 or 4 Digit SIC Code Industry Sector 111 01 0100 Agriculture Production  crops 112 02 0200 Agriculture Production  livestock 2122 10 1000 Metal Mining 211 13 1300 Oil and Gas Extraction 2123 14 1400 Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels 311, 312 3115 3113 20 2000 202 206 Food and Kindred Products 3122 21 2100 Tobacco Manufacturers 313, 315 22 2200 Textile and Mill Products 3152, 3159, 314 23 2300 Apparel and other textile products 321 3211, 3219 24 2400 242 Lumber and Wood Products, Except Furniture 337 3371, 3372 25 2500 251 Furniture and fixtures 3 to 6 Digit NAICS Code 2 Digit SIC Code 3 or 4 Digit SIC Code Industry Sector 74 322 32212 322130 26 2600 2621 2631 Paper and Allied Products Paper Mills, Except Building Paper Paperboard Mills 325 32541 3251 3251 325211 325 325311 28 2800 283 286 2819 2821 2869 2873 Chemicals and Allied Products Industrial Inorganic Chemicals Plastic Materials and Resins Industrial Organic Chemicals Nitrogenous Fertilizers 324 32411 324110 29 2900 291 2911 Petroleum Refining and Related Industries Petroleum Refining 3 to 6 Digit NAICS Code 2 Digit SIC Code 3 or 4 Digit SIC Code Industry Sector 75 326, 339 32622, 33999 30 3000 305 Rubber and miscellaneous plastics 316 31 3100 Leather and leather products 327 327310 32 3200 3241 Stone, Clay, Glass, and Concrete Products Cement, Hydraulic 331 331 331111, 331221, 324199 331312 33 3300 331 3312 3334 Primary Metals Industries Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills Primary Aluminum 332, 333, 336 34 3400 Fabricated metal products 333, 332, 334, 336 35 3500 Industrial machinery and equipment 334, 335 36 3600 Electrical and electronic equipment 336 37 3700 Transportation equipment 334, 339 38 3800 Instruments and related products 339, 332 39 3900 Miscellaneous manufacturing industries 482 40 4000 Rail transportation 483, 488 44 4400 Water transportation 481, 488 45 4500 Transportation by air 488 47 4700 Transportation services 221, 562 2213, 562 49 4900 495 Electric, Gas, and Sanitary Services ( except 4911)

221310 4941 Water Supply 221320 4952 Sewerage System 56221 4953 Refuse System 3 to 6 Digit NAICS Code 2 Digit SIC Code 3 or 4 Digit SIC Code Industry Sector 76 531 65 6500 Real estate 561, 532, 541, 711, 812 73 7300 Business services 621, 622, 623 80 8000 Health Services 611 6112, 6113 82 8200 822 Educational Services 624, 813 83 8300 Social services 541 87 8700 Engineering and management services 814 88 8800 Private households 541 89 8900 Miscellaneous services 921 91 9100 Public Administration 1 Source of data is Form EIA 867 2 In changing from an SIC code based system to an NAICS code based one, all industries were restructured and redefined . As a result, there may not be a direct conversion of some industries, as portions of an industry may be restructured to another category. This table identifies the primary NAICS codes for the listed industry sectors, but EPA notes that the NAICS codes for some industries may not be included.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 6, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36936-36942]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11909]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1678; Airspace Docket No. 22-AWA-4]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of the Nashville International Airport Class C
Airspace; Nashville, TN; and the John C. Tune Airport Class D Airspace;
Nashville, TN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action reconfigures the Nashville International Airport
(BNA) Class C airspace area and amends the ceiling of the John C. Tune
Airport (JWN) Class D airspace area. The FAA is taking this action to
reduce the risk of midair collisions and enhance the efficient
management of air traffic operations in the Nashville, TN, terminal
area.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, August 10, 2023. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), all
comments received, this final rule, and all background material may be
viewed online at www.regulations.gov using the FAA Docket number.
Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are available on the website.
It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. You may also contact the Rules and
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it amends the Nashville, TN, Class C airspace area, and
the John C. Tune Airport Class D airspace area as necessary to enhance
aviation safety in the Nashville terminal area.

History

    The FAA published a NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2022-1678, in the
Federal Register (88 FR 5283; January 27, 2023), proposing to amend the
Nashville, TN, Class C airspace area, and the John C. Tune Class D
airspace area. Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal.
Twenty-five comments were received.

Discussion of Comments

    One commenter wrote that BNA should be upgraded to a Class B
airspace area, while two commenters were not in favor of Class B
airspace at BNA. The NPRM proposed modifications to the existing Class
C airspace area at BNA. Class B airspace at BNA is not being proposed,
therefore it is outside the scope of this rulemaking action. While BNA
currently meets the Class B enplaned passenger count criteria, at this
time, it does not meet the total airport operations criteria to be
considered as a candidate for a Class B airspace designation.
    The majority of the comments concerned the impacts of the proposed
lateral and vertical boundaries of the BNA Class C 15 nautical miles
(NM) eastern outer ring on aircraft arriving at Lebanon Municipal
Airport (M54). The 15 NM ring moves the Class C boundary to a point
approximately 3 NM west of M54. Commenters wrote that M54 needs more
space to maneuver. They stated that, when the wind is from the north,
aircraft entering the traffic pattern for runway 01 at M54 would be
concentrated into the already congested area west of M54 between the
airport, and the eastern 15 NM ring of Class C airspace. As a result,
pilots would be focusing on remaining clear of the Class C airspace
while either just transiting northbound or southbound through the area
or entering the traffic pattern downwind leg to land on runway 01 at
M54. This could lead to unintended incursions into the Class C
airspace.
    The commenters made several suggestions for alleviating these
concerns, including:
     Raising the floor in a portion of the eastern outer ring
of the Class C airspace (e.g., from the 060[deg] bearing from BNA,
clockwise to the 155[deg] bearing from BNA, etc.) from 2,400 feet mean
sea level (MSL) to 2,600 feet MSL, which would be 1,000 feet above
M54's traffic pattern altitude.
     Adding a cutout from the Class C within a 5 NM radius of
M54.
     Moving the 15 NM outer east ring boundary westward,
farther away from M54. One commenter suggested aligning the east ring
boundary along Interstate I-840 and Highway 109 providing a visual
landmark to define the boundary.
    The FAA considered the commenters' suggestions; however, each
suggestion would result in reduced Class C airspace in areas where
airspace control and communications between air traffic control (ATC)
and all aircraft is warranted. Class C airspace is designed to keep ATC
informed of all aircraft operating within the Class C area. This is
important so that air traffic controllers are aware of all pilots'
intentions. Heading and/or altitude changes made by unidentified, non-
participating pilots are unpredictable, which may require controllers
to take preventative action to avoid potential conflicts with other
aircraft that are under their control. Such circumstances may disrupt
the orderly flow of arrivals and departures as well as increase
controller workload.
    Regarding the suggestion to raise the east outer ring floor to
2,600-foot MSL, the purpose of setting the east outer ring floor at
2,400 feet MSL is to allow ATC to provide needed separation between all
Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) aircraft landing on runway 19 at Smyrna
Airport (MQY), and non-participating Visual Flight Rules (VFR)
aircraft. Aircraft flying the published instrument approach to MQY
runway 19 cross the WULIG waypoint (WP) (located approximately 11 NM
northeast of MQY) at 3,000 feet MSL. As MQY traffic volume continues to
increase, aircraft are being sequenced at or before the WULIG WP on the
runway 19 instrument approach. Raising the outer ring floor to 2,600
feet MSL reduces effective separation outside of WULIG and increases
the likelihood of Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
Resolution Advisory (RA) events for inbound aircraft.
    Regarding the suggestions to move the eastern ring boundary
westward, away from M54, the FAA is unable to adopt the suggestions.
When aircraft are arriving and departing BNA to the north, numerous
aircraft depart from runway 02R on a noise abatement heading of
055[deg]. BNA departures are vectored into the eastern ring area to
remain clear of BNA arrivals that are descending on the PASLY Standard
Terminal Arrival (STAR). Currently, to clear aircraft on the STAR, BNA
departure traffic must remain at 4,000 feet MSL. Additionally, the
volume of pilot training traffic generated by flight schools operating
in this area from airports east of BNA, including M54, MQY, and
Murfreesboro Municipal (MBT), underscores the need for expanded Class C
airspace in the east outer ring out to 15 NM.
    Several commenters expressed concerns regarding controller staffing
levels at BNA Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) in light of
increasing traffic volume and controller workload. The FAA will
continue to provide VFR flight following services as duty priorities
allow. A larger area of controlled airspace will significantly increase
safety for all users but may

result in increased demand for air traffic services.

Incorporation by Reference

    Class C airspace areas are published in paragraph 4000, and Class D
airspace areas are published in paragraph 5000, of FAA Order JO
7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on an annual basis. This
document amends the current version of that order, FAA Order JO
7400.11G dated August 19, 2022, and effective September 15, 2022. FAA
Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSSES
section of this document. These amendments will be published in the
next update to FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,
air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part by expanding the BNA Class C
airspace area and lowering the ceiling of the JWN Class D airspace area
(see the attached chart).
    This action makes minor edits in the text header of the BNA Class C
airspace description, as published in FAA Order JO 7400.11, by updating
the BNA airport reference point (ARP) coordinates from ``lat.
36[deg]07'28'' N, long. 86[deg]40'42'' W'' to ``lat. 36[deg]07'28'' N,
long. 86[deg]40'41'' W'' This reflects the latest information in the
Airport Master Records file. In addition, the Smyrna Airport, TN (MQY),
is added to the text header because that airport is referenced in the
Class C description. The Class C modifications are described below.
    This action raises the BNA Class C airspace area ceiling from 4,600
feet MSL up to and including 6,000 feet MSL and extends the outer ring
of the Class C airspace area from the current 10 NM radius from BNA to
the 15 NM radius from BNA.
    Additionally, the Class C surface area radius is extended from the
current 5 NM radius from BNA to the 7 NM radius from BNA, starting from
the 335[deg] bearing from the airport, clockwise to the 230[deg]
bearing from the airport. However, the surface area radius remains at 5
NM from BNA from the 230[deg] bearing, clockwise to the 335[deg]
bearing from the airport. The Class C surface area also excludes that
portion of airspace that is within the Smyrna Airport Class D airspace
area. The BNA Class C airspace also includes:
     That airspace extending upward from 1,800 feet MSL to
6,000 feet MSL within a 15-mile radius of Nashville International
Airport from the 335[deg] bearing from the airport clockwise to the
060[deg] bearing from the airport;
     That airspace extending upward from 2,400 feet MSL to
6,000 feet MSL within a 15-mile radius of the airport from the 060[deg]
bearing from the airport clockwise to the 155[deg] bearing from the
airport, excluding that portion within the Smyrna Airport, TN, Class D
airspace area;
     That airspace extending upward from 1,800 feet MSL to
6,000 feet MSL within a 15-mile radius of Nashville International
Airport from the 155[deg] bearing from the airport clockwise to the
230[deg] bearing from the airport; and
     That airspace extending upward from 2,400 feet MSL to
6,000 feet MSL within a 15-mile radius of Nashville International
Airport from the 230[deg] bearing from the airport clockwise to the
335[deg] bearing from the airport.
    This action also amends the John C. Tune Airport (JWN) Class D
airspace area by replacing the current 2,500-foot MSL ceiling with ``to
but not including 2,400 feet MSL.'' The westward expansion of the BNA
Class C airspace, with a floor of 2,400 feet MSL, overlies the JWN
Class D airspace. Lowering the JWN Class D ceiling as described creates
a clearer delineation between the Class C and Class D airspace areas,
thus reducing the potential for pilot confusion over the airspace
status.
    Annual air traffic volume in BNA TRACON's area has increased by
49.2% since 2015, including significant volume increases at M54, JWN,
MQY, and BNA airports. Due to the continuing rise in traffic, the
predictability resulting from the BNA Class C airspace modification is
needed to provide a safe and stable environment for arrivals and
departures at BNA as well as the surrounding airports.
    This rulemaking action is required to reduce the risk of midair
collisions and enhance the efficient management of air traffic
operations in the Nashville, TN, terminal area.

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Federal agencies consider impacts of regulatory actions under a
variety of executive orders and other requirements. First, Executive
Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct that each Federal agency
shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination
that the benefits of the intended regulation justify the costs. Second,
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires
agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits
agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to
the foreign commerce of the United States. Fourth, the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to
prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects
of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. The current
threshold after adjustment for inflation is $177 million using the most
current (2022) Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product.
This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of the
economic impacts of this rule.
    In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this
rule: will have a minimal cost impact; is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866; will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities; will not create unnecessary obstacles to the
foreign commerce of the United States; and will not impose an unfunded
mandate on State, local, or tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
    As discussed above, the FAA determined that changes put forth in
this final rule will reduce the risk of midair collisions, efficiency,
and airspace utilization. The final rule reconfigures BNA Class C
airspace area and amends the ceiling of JWN Class D airspace area.
Operations at BNA are rebounding from the drop in traffic that resulted
during the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. In addition, air
traffic in the Nashville terminal area has increased dramatically in
all categories of aircraft. The existing Class C airspace no longer
meets the needs of air traffic control and enhanced safety in the BNA
terminal area. The goals of the final rule are to reduce the risk of
midair collisions and improve the efficient management of air traffic
operations in the Nashville, TN, terminal area.
    The final rule modifies the BNA Class C airspace area and requires
VFR aircraft to establish radio contact with ATC thereby enhancing
safety and efficiency in the BNA terminal area. VFR operators only
needs to make minor adjustments to accommodate the expanded
availability of Class C services around BNA. Therefore, the FAA expects
the final rule will result in minimal cost to VFR operators.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and
of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and informational
requirements to the scale of the businesses, organizations, and
governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation.'' To achieve this
principle, agencies are required to solicit and consider flexible
regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their actions to
assure that such proposals are given serious consideration.'' The RFA
covers a wide range of small entities, including small businesses, not-
for-profit organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the agency may so
certify, and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. The
certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for
this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.
    The final rule reconfigures BNA Class C airspace area and amends
the ceiling JWN Class D airspace area. The FAA is taking this action to
reduce the risk of midair collisions and enhance the efficient
management of air traffic operations in the Nashville, TN, terminal
area. The FAA determined that changes put forth in this rule increase
airspace safety and efficiency.
    The change affects general aviation operators using BNA Class C
airspace area and amends the ceiling JWN Class D airspace area.
Operators flying VFR needs to adjust their flight paths to avoid the
modified Class C airspace and Class D airspace if the pilots wish to
operate without contacting ATC. However, the modifications are intended
to address the concerns raised by air traffic without being burdensome.
Therefore, as provided in section 605(b), the head of the FAA certifies
that this rulemaking will not result in a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has
assessed the potential effect of this final rule and determined that it
should improve safety and is consistent with the Trade Agreements Act.
The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this final rule and
determined that it would improve safety and is consistent with the
Trade Agreements Act.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
governs the issuance of Federal regulations that require unfunded
mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that requires a state,
local, or tribal government or the private sector to incur direct costs
without the Federal government having first provided the funds to pay
those costs. The FAA determined that the final rule will not result in
the expenditure of $177 million or more by State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector, in any one year.
This final rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, the Act
does not apply.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that
there is no new information collection requirement associated with this
final rule.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of reconfiguring the
existing Nashville International Airport (BNA) Class C area and
amending the ceiling of the John C. Tune Airport (JWN) Class D airspace
area in Nashville, TN, qualifies for categorical exclusion under the
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with
FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,
paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further
environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify
classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see
14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas;
Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points). As such, this action
is not expected to result in any potentially significant environmental
impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding
Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for
factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded
action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further
analysis. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that no extraordinary
circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental
assessment or environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

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

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

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 4000 Subpart C--Class C Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO TN C Nashville, TN [Amended]

Nashville International Airport, TN
    (Lat. 36[deg]07'28'' N, long. 86[deg]40'41'' W)
Smyrna Airport, TN
    (Lat. 36[deg]00'32'' N, long. 86[deg]31'12'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to 6,000 feet
MSL within a 5-mile radius of Nashville International Airport; and
that airspace extending upward from the surface to 6,000 feet MSL
within a 7-mile radius of Nashville International Airport from the
335[deg] bearing from the airport clockwise to the 230[deg] bearing
from the airport, excluding that portion within the Smyrna Airport,
TN, Class D airspace area; and that airspace extending upward from

1,800 feet MSL to 6,000 feet MSL within a 15-mile radius of
Nashville International Airport from the 335[deg] bearing from the
airport clockwise to the 060[deg] bearing from the airport; and that
airspace extending upward from 2,400 feet MSL to 6,000 feet MSL
within a 15-mile radius of the airport from the 060[deg] bearing
from the airport clockwise to the 155[deg] bearing from the airport,
excluding that portion within the Smyrna Airport, TN, Class D
airspace area; and that airspace extending upward from 1,800 feet
MSL to 6,000 feet MSL within a 15-mile radius of Nashville
International Airport from the 155[deg] bearing from the airport
clockwise to the 230[deg] bearing from the airport; and that
airspace extending upward from 2,400 feet MSL to 6,000 feet MSL
within a 15-mile radius of Nashville International Airport from the
230[deg] bearing from the airport clockwise to the 335[deg] bearing
from the airport.
* * * * *

Paragraph 5000 Subpart D--Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ASO TN D Nashville, TN [Amended]

John C. Tune Airport, TN

    (Lat. 36[deg]10'59'' N, long. 86[deg]53'11'' W)

    That airspace upward from the surface to but not including 2,400
feet MSL within a 4.1-mile radius of John C. Tune Airport, and
within 1.2-miles each side of the 195[deg] bearing from the airport,
extending from the 4.1-mile radius to 6.1-miles south of the
airport, and within 1.2-miles each side of the 015[deg] bearing from
the airport, extending from the 4.1-mile radius to 6.1-miles north
of the airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the
specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Air
Missions. The effective dates and times will thereafter be
continuously published in the Chart Supplement.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06JN23.000

* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 31, 2023.
Brian Konie,
Acting Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2023-11909 Filed 6-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 14, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38929-38930]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12822]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

Federal Register CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: 88 FR 38117, June
12, 2023.

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING: Thursday, June 15,
2023 at 2:00 p.m.

CHANGES IN THE MEETING: The Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, June
15, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. has been changed to Thursday, June 15, 2023 at
10:00 a.m.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  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>.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated: June 12, 2023.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-12822 Filed 6-12-23; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 75)]
[Notices]
[Page 18222-18223]
[DOCID:fr21ap09-50]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RC08-5-001]

North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Notice of Filing

October 7, 2008.
    Take notice that on October 6, 2008, the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC) submitted for filing in compliance with
Commission Order issued July 21, 2008, the NERC Board of Trustees
Compliance Committee's decision on remand affirming Reliability First
Corporation's decision to retain the United States Department of
Energy, Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office's registration as a Load-
Serving Entity on the NERC Compliance Registry.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on November 5, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-9088 Filed 4-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


From:	Mathias, Scott
Sent:	Monday, January 26, 2015 9:52 AM
To:	Szabo, Aaron
Cc:	Pepple, Karl
Subject:	RE: EO 12866_13563 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
Ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) Final Rule
Attachments:	1-26-15 EO12866_Ozone SIP Req_2060-AR34_Final_PreambleRule_20141006
- contains edits from OMB_clean rlso.docx

Aaron,

The attached redlined version of the Ozone SIP Requirements SRR contains the following edits:
1)	Edits resulting from the written comments OMB provided to EPA. These are labeled with
comment bubbles as:
a.	OMB general comments,
b.	OMB specific comments, and
c.	OMB typographical comments;
2)	Nearly all edits necessary to reflect the results of the recent NRDC decision regarding the
2012 ozone implementation rule’s treatment of attainment dates and revoking the 1997
NAAQS for purposes of transportation conformity only (see note below);
3)	Edit to Table 1 acknowledging that another nonattainment area has been redesignated to
attainment
4)	Edits resulting from discussion with OMB and inter-agency partners on 1/23/15
regarding EPA’s responses to the prior written comments.
5)	Edits from an additional December 2014 review by EPA OGC staff.
Note: This version does not yet contain a new preamble (perhaps section III.Y) and
accompanying regulatory text changes to 40 CFR 51.1103 to establish the attainment deadlines
consistent with the recent NRDC decision. That language will be added after further internal
EPA discussions with counsel.

Scott Mathias | Associate Director, Air Quality Policy Division | U.S. EPA, RTP, NC 27711 |
919.541.5310


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 47 (Wednesday, March 11, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12816-12817]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05543]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER15-1170-000]

Bear Mountain Limited; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of Bear Mountain Limited's application for

market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule, noting
that such application includes a request for blanket authorization,
under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions
of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is March 24, 2015.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 4, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-05543 Filed 3-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 175 (Monday, September 10, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45723-45724]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19644]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0053]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt eight individuals from
the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers have
``no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or
any other condition which is likely to cause loss of consciousness or
any loss of ability to control a CMV.'' The exemptions enable these
individuals who have had one or more seizures and are taking anti-
seizure medication to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable on August 1, 2018. The exemptions
expire on August 1, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected], 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.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and/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., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed
at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On June 21, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of
applications from eight individuals requesting an exemption from the
epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) and
requested comments from the public (83 FR 28896). The public comment
period ended on July 23, 2018, and six comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that granting exemptions to these individuals would achieve
a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be
achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria \1\ to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce. [49 CFR part 391, APPENDIX A TO PART 391--MEDICAL
ADVISORY CRITERIA, section H. Epilepsy: Sec.  391.41(b)(8), paragraphs
3, 4, and 5.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=e47b48a9ea42dd67d999246e23d97970&mc=true&node=pt49.5.391&rgn=div5#ap49.5.391_171.a and https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title49-vol5/pdf/CFR-2015-title49-vol5-part391-appA.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received six comments in this proceeding. Four of these
comments supported granted the exemptions. One commenter did not
support granting these exemptions due to his or her concerns about
these drivers refilling their medications while they are operating a
CMVs on an interstate basis. Another commenter suggested that these
applicants should provide complete medical histories and records and be
incident free for at least two years. This commenter also stated his or
her opinion that employers of drivers who have been issued an exemption
be required to obtain additional accident liability insurance for these
drivers. In reviewing these applications for exemptions, FMCSA
evaluated the medical records of all eight applicants, obtained
documentation of the treating physician's support for granting the
applicant an exemption, and determined that granting these exemptions
would achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would be
achieved without the exemption. FMCSA does not require employers to
obtain additional insurance for drivers with medical exemptions.

IV. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the epilepsy and seizure disorder prohibition in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(8) if the exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent or
greater level of safety than would be achieved without the exemption.
The exemption allows the applicants to operate CMVs in interstate
commerce.
    In reaching the decision to grant these exemption requests, FMCSA
considered the 2007 recommendations of the Agency's Medical Expert
Panel (MEP). The January 15, 2013, Federal Register notice (78 FR 3069)
provides the current MEP recommendations which is the criteria the
Agency uses to grant seizure exemptions.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on an individualized assessment of each applicant's medical
information, including the root cause of the respective seizure(s) and
medical information about the applicant's seizure history, the length
of time that has elapsed since the individual's last seizure, the
stability of each individual's treatment regimen and the duration of
time on or off of anti-seizure medication. In addition, the Agency
reviewed the treating clinician's medical opinion related to the
ability of the driver to safely operate a CMV with a history of seizure
and each applicant's driving record found in the Commercial Driver's
License Information System (CDLIS) for commercial driver's license
(CDL) holders, and interstate and

intrastate inspections recorded in the Motor Carrier Management
Information System (MCMIS). For non-CDL holders, the Agency reviewed
the driving records from the State Driver's Licensing Agency (SDLA). A
summary of each applicant's seizure history was discussed in the June
21, 2018 Federal Register notice (83 FR 28896) and will not be repeated
in this notice.
    These eight applicants have been seizure-free over a range of 4 to
40 years while taking anti-seizure medication and maintained a stable
medication treatment regimen for the last two years. In each case, the
applicant's treating physician verified his or her seizure history and
supports the ability to drive commercially.
    The Agency acknowledges the potential consequences of a driver
experiencing a seizure while operating a CMV. However, the Agency
believes the drivers granted this exemption have demonstrated that they
are unlikely to have a seizure and their medical condition does not
pose a risk to public safety.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these
applicants from the epilepsy and seizure disorder prohibition in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(8) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that
existing without the exemption.

V. Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1)
Each driver must remain seizure-free and maintain a stable treatment
during the two-year exemption period; (2) each driver must submit
annual reports from their treating physicians attesting to the
stability of treatment and that the driver has remained seizure-free;
(3) each driver must undergo an annual medical examination by a
certified Medical Examiner, as defined by 49 CFR 390.5; and (4) each
driver must provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the
employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep a
copy of his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-employed.
The driver must also have a copy of the exemption when driving, for
presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement
official.

VI. Preemption

    During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with
respect to a person operating under the exemption.

VII. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the eight exemption applications,
FMCSA exempts the following drivers from the epilepsy and seizure
disorder prohibition, 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8), subject to the requirements
cited above:

Ricky B. Alegre (NJ)
Stephen M. Christner (PA)
Paul J. Gomez (CA)
Lawrence J. Knox (MA)
Thomas A. Ork (NY)
Constance Seale (DE)
Anne M. Spencer-Brown (WV)
Floyd C. Williams (VA)

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), each exemption will be
valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by
FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The
person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption;
(2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was
maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136 and 31315.

    Issued on: August 30, 2018.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-19644 Filed 9-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P