[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59796-59797]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24165]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2488-018.
    Applicants: Oasis Power Partners, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Oasis Power
Partners, LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5136.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-234-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amended and Restated TCIA
with Western Spirit Transmission LLC to be effective 10/31/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5133.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-235-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Initial rate filing: EPC between PNM and Pattern NM
Wind LLC to be effective 10/14/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5134.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-236-000.
    Applicants: Tucson Electric Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Sunzia Transmission
Interconnection Agreement to be effective 12/30/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5158.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-237-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Q3 2019 Quarterly Filing of
City and County of San Francisco's WDT SA (SA 275) to be effective 9/
30/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5160.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-238-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original WMPA SA No. 5495;
Queue No. AE1-124 to be effective 9/30/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5166.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-239-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: ISA #4413(amend), 5298,
5299; ICSA #4422(amend), 5368, 5369; Queue #T131/AC1-173 to be
effective 2/18/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5184.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-240-000.
    Applicants: Hattiesburg Farm, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Non-Material
Change in Status & SE Category Seller Change to be effective 10/31/
2019.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5187.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-241-000.
    Applicants: Simon Solar Farm LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Non-Material
Change in Status & SE Category Seller Change to be effective 10/31/
2019.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5193.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-242-000.
    Applicants: Sunshine Valley Solar, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: MBR Application to be
effective 10/31/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5197.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-243-000.
    Applicants: SR Millington, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Non-Material
Change in Status & SE Category Seller Change to be effective 10/31/
2019.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5199.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying
facility filings:

    Docket Numbers: QF20-170-000.
    Applicants: Eco Green Generation LLC.
    Description: Form 556 of Eco Green Generation LLC [Clean Power #6].
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5135.
    Comments Due: Non-Applicable.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 30, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-24165 Filed 11-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 168)]
[Notices]
[Page 51601-51603]
[DOCID:fr30au06-87]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

August 23, 2006.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER06-1221-002.
    Applicants: Parkview AMC Energy, LLC.
    Description: Parkview AMC Energy, LLC submits its Electric Rate
Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, to become effective as of 7/5/06.
    Filed Date: 08/16/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060818-0123.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 29, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1332-001.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits its First
Revised Rate Schedules FERC 207 & FERC 211 to the Reliability Must-Run
Service Agreement with California Independent System Operator
Corporation.
    Filed Date: 08/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060823-0006.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 11, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1377-000.
    Applicants: Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation.
    Description: Rochester Gas and Electric Corp submits its Second
Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement with RE Ginna Nuclear Power
Plant, LLC for the Robert E Ginna Nuclear Station in the Town of
Ontario, County of Wayne.
    Filed Date: 08/17/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060822-0101.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, September 07, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1378-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits a Facilities Construction Agreement with Rugby Wind, LLC et al.

    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060821-0186.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1379-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits a Notice of Cancellation of various Transmission Service
Agreements et al. and also submit an errata to this filing.
    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060821-0185.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1380-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Co. submits its revised
rate sheets to the Interconnection Facilities Agreement, Service
Agreement 96, FERC Electric Tariff, First Revised Volume 5 with the
City of Corona.
    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060821-0184.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1381-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Co. submits revised rate
sheets to the Interconnection Facilities Agreement Service Agreement
106, FERC Electric Tariff, First Revised Volume 5 with the City of
Moreno Valley.
    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060821-0183.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1382-000; ER05-522-000.
    Applicants: Bluegrass Generation Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Blue Grass Generation Co., LLC submits its revised
rate schedule for providing cost-based Reactive Supply and Voltage
Control from Generation Sources Service pursuant to Section 205 of the
Federal Power Act.
    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060821-0182.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1383-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.; Northeast Utilities Service
Company; The Connecticut Light and Power Company; Western Massachusetts
Electric Company, Holyoke Power and Electric Company.
    Description: ISO New England Inc. and Northeast Utilities Service
Co on behalf of The Connecticut Light and Power Co. et al. submit 15
interconnection agreements.
    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060822-0130.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1384-000.
    Applicants: Entergy-Koch Trading, LP.
    Description: Entergy-Koch Trading LP submits a Notice of
Cancellation of FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 08/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060823-0014.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 11, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1385-000.
    Applicants: Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation.
    Description: Niagara Mohawk Power Corp dba National Grid submits
Original Service Agreement No. 919 with the County of Monroe.
    Filed Date: 08/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060823-0010.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 11, 2006.
    Docket Numbers: ER06-1386-000.
    Applicants: FirstEnergy Generation Corporation.
    Description: FirstEnergy Generation Corp submits a revised Genco
Power Supply Agreement with FirstEnergy Solutions Corp, effective 1/1/
06.
    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060823-0025.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1387-000.
    Applicants: FirstEnergy Service Company.
    Description: FirstEnergy Service Company submits a revised
Mansfield Power Supply Agreement with Toledo Edison Co et al, effective
1/1/06.
    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060823-0028.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1388-000.
    Applicants: FirstEnergy Nuclear Generation Corp.
    Description: FirstEnergy Nuclear Generation Corp submits a revised
Nuclear Power Supply Agreement to become effective 1/1/06.
    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060823-0026.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1389-000.
    Applicants: FirstEnergy Service Company.
    Description: First Energy Service Co submits Nuclear Sale/Leaseback
Power Supply Agreement of Ohio Edison Co and the Toledo Edison Company.
    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060823-0022.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1390-000.
    Applicants: Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co submits a Notice of
Cancellation of its Rate Schedule FERC 142, Amended and Restated Line
Lease Agreement with Oklahoma Municipal Power Authority.
    Filed Date: 08/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060823-0050.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 11, 2006.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following public
utility holding company filings:
    Docket Numbers: PH06-105-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Corporation.
    Description: El Paso Corporation submits it notice of Exemption
pursuant to sections 366.3(b) and 366.4(b)(1) of PUHCA of 2005.
    Filed Date: 08/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20060823-0011.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, September 08, 2006.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    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
14 copies

of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings 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 e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-14396 Filed 8-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Human Resources Consulting Services........     541612  $16.5 million in revenue......            1            1
Business and Secretarial Schools...........     611410  $8 million in revenue.........            1            1
Other Technical and Trade Schools..........     611519  $16.5 million in revenue......            3            3
Sports and Recreation Instruction..........     611620  $8 million in revenue.........            1            1
Ambulance Services.........................     621910  $16.5 million in revenue......            1            0
Firms Where the Industry Could not be              N/A  N/A...........................            6            6
 Identified.
                                                                                -------------------------
    Total..................................  .........  ..............................           35           18
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in the Costs section of this RA, we estimate that it takes
either 6 hours to prepare and submit a course approval request for a
modified basic firefighting course or 12 hours if the course approval
request requires additional information and resubmission. A training
and development specialist's time is valued at a burdened rate of
$45.51, for a total cost of either $273.06, or $546.12.\39\ For this
rule to impose a significant impact on a small entity, the impact would
have to be greater than 1 percent (.01) of a small entity's annual
revenue. That is, for this rule to have a significant economic impact
on an entity, the entity's annual revenue has to be less than $54,612
($546.12 / 0.01 = $54,612). Out of the 8 small entities for which we
had revenue information, none had annual revenue under $54,612. Table
13 indicates the distribution of revenue impacts for the small entities
for which we were able to identify revenue information.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See footnote 26 for a calculation of the burdened wage rate
for training and development specialists. 6 hours x $45.51 per hour
is $273.06, while 12 hours x $45.51 per hour is $546.12.
    \40\ We were not able to identify revenue information for the 4
nonprofit small entities and for 6 firms we identified as small
businesses.

                                    Table 13--Distribution of Revenue Impacts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Small entities    Portion of small
                Percent of revenue impact                   Average annual     with known        entities with
                                                                impact           revenue         known revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<1%......................................................          $546.12                 8                 100
1-3%.....................................................           546.12                 0                   0

>3%......................................................           546.12                 0                   0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, based on this analysis, the Coast Guard certifies under
5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, we offer to assist small
entities in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. The Coast Guard
will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain
about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).

D. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for a change to the existing information collection
(OMB Control Number 1625-0028) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520. As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection
of information'' comprises reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring,
posting, labeling, and other similar actions. The title and description
of the information collections, a description of those who must collect
the information, and an estimate of the total annual burden follow. The
estimate covers the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing
sources of data, gathering, and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection.
    Title: Course Approval and Records for Merchant Mariner Training
Schools.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0028.
    Summary of the Modification to the Collection of Information: This
rule permits training providers to offer a new course, approved under
46 CFR 10.402 and 10.403, by permitting inland waters and Western
Rivers towing vessel master and mate (pilot) applicants to take a
modified basic course in lieu of a basic firefighting course.
    Need for Information: The Coast Guard will need to receive a course
approval submission from training providers who will offer a modified
basic inland waters and Western Rivers towing vessel firefighting
course.
    Proposed Use of the Information: The collection of information is
intended to ensure that training providers meet the regulatory
requirements for the courses that they offer.
    Description of the Respondents: The respondents are training
providers wishing to offer a modified basic inland waters and Western
Rivers towing vessel firefighting course.
    Number of Respondents: The Coast Guard estimates that there will
not be any additional respondents, because the training providers
requesting approval of a modified basic inland waters and Western
Rivers towing vessel firefighting course already have other courses
approved by the Coast Guard. As such, the Coast Guard expects there
will be no additional respondents because the respondents are already
included in the collection of information. Out of the 315 current
annual respondents for OMB Control Number 1625-0028, 91 are currently
approved to offer a basic firefighting course. Based on information
provided by an SME from the Coast Guard's Office of Merchant Mariner
Credentialing, we estimate that 23 of the 91 training providers
offering a basic firefighting course will likely request approval of a
modified basic inland waters and Western Rivers towing vessel
firefighting course.
    Frequency of Response: We expect that 62 percent of the training
providers will request course approval and not need to provide
additional information, and the other 38 percent will request course
approval and need to provide additional information. The Coast Guard
expects these requests to happen in the first year. Therefore, we
estimate that there will be 32 additional responses from this rule (23
initial submissions, plus 9 submissions of additional information).
    Burden of Response: Out of the 32 responses, the Coast Guard
estimates that 23 will take 6 hours to request approval of a modified
basic inland waters and Western Rivers towing vessel firefighting
course because the training provider's submission complies with Coast
Guard policies and regulations. Another 9 responses will take an
additional 6 hours because the course package will need to be revised
and resubmitted.
    Estimate of Total Annual Burden: All 32 responses will take 6 hours
to complete. Consequently, the Coast Guard estimates that 32 x 6, or
192 hours, will be incurred by training providers in requesting new
modified basic firefighting course approvals.
    As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we will submit a copy of this
rule to OMB for its review of the collection of information.
    You are not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has not
yet completed its review of this collection. Once OMB completes action
on our information collection request, we will publish a Federal
Register notice describing OMB's action.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13132 and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132. Our analysis follows.
    It is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
reserved for regulation by the Coast Guard. It is also well settled
that all of the categories covered in 46 U.S.C. 7101 (personnel
qualifications of officers serving on board merchant vessels), and any
other category in which Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the
sole source of a vessel's obligations, are within the field foreclosed
from regulation by the States. See, e.g., United States v. Locke,

529 U.S. 89 (2000) (finding that the states are foreclosed from
regulating tanker vessels) see also Ray v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 435
U.S. 151, 157 (1978) (state regulation is preempted where ``the scheme
of federal regulation may be so pervasive as to make reasonable the
inference that Congress left no room for the States to supplement it
[or where] the Act of Congress may touch a field in which the federal
interest is so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to
preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject.'' (citations
omitted)). Because this rule involves the credentialing of merchant
mariner officers under 46 U.S.C. 7101, it relates to personnel
qualifications for vessels subject to a pervasive scheme of federal
regulation and is therefore foreclosed from regulation by the States.
Because the States may not regulate within this category, this rule is
consistent with the principles of federalism and preemption
requirements in Executive Order 13132.
    While it is well settled that States may not regulate in categories
in which Congress intended the Coast Guard to be the sole source of a
vessel's obligations, the Coast Guard recognizes the key role that
State and local governments may have in making regulatory
determinations. Additionally, for rules with federalism implications
and preemptive effect, Executive Order 13132 specifically directs
agencies to consult with State and local governments during the
rulemaking process. If you believe this proposed rule would have
implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, please call or
email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION section of this
preamble.
    Therefore, because the States may not regulate within these
categories, this rule is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.

F. Unfunded Mandates

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538,
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Although this rule will not result
in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630 (Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights).

H. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform) to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

I. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045 (Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks). This
rule is not an economically significant rule and will not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments),
because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

K. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211 (Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use). We have determined that it is not a
``significant energy action'' under that order because it is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.

L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act, codified as a
note to 15 U.S.C. 272, directs agencies to use voluntary consensus
standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides
Congress, through OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards
would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g.,
specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test
methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices)
that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01, Rev. 1,\41\ associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a determination that this action is one of a category of actions that
do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the
human environment. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on
locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. This
rule is categorically excluded under paragraphs L52 and L56 of Appendix
A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev.1. Paragraph
L52 pertains to regulations concerning vessel operation safety
standards and paragraph L56 pertains to regulations concerning the
training, qualifying, and credentialing of maritime personnel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DHS_Instruction%20Manual%20023-01-001-01%20Rev%2001_508%20Admin%20Rev.pdf. This document was last accessed
on April 24, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rule revises the existing merchant mariner credentialing
training requirements for national endorsements as master and mate
(pilot) for towing vessels. The changes apply to mariners working on
towing vessels inspected under 46 CFR subchapter M when operating on
inland waters or Western Rivers routes. Under the rule, these mariners
will only be required to complete training that is relevant to the
firefighting equipment that is available on their vessels. This change
promotes marine safety by focusing attention on the resources actually
available to affected mariners.

List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 11

    Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools,
Seamen.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
46 CFR part 11 as follows:

0
1. The authority citation for part 11 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 14 U.S.C. 503; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 46 U.S.C. 2101, 2103,
and 2110; 46 U.S.C. chapter 71; 46 U.S.C. 7502, 7505, 7701, 8906,
and 70105; E.O. 10173; DHS Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No.
01.3. Section 11.107 is also issued under the authority of 44 U.S.C.
3507.

0
2. Amend Sec.  11.201 by:
0
a. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (h)(1) introductory text;
0
b. Revising paragraphs (h)(2)(i), (h)(3)(i) and (ii);
0
c. Adding paragraphs (h)(3)(iii) and (iv); and
0
d. In paragraph (l), after the word ``service'' and before the words
``and examination'' adding the text ``, training''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  11.201  General requirements for national and STCW officer
endorsements.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (1) Applicants for an original officer endorsement in the following
categories must present a certificate of completion from a firefighting
course of instruction relevant to the endorsement being sought that has
been approved by the Coast Guard. * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) All national officer endorsements as master or mate on seagoing
vessels of 200 GRT or more.
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) All officer endorsements as master on vessels of less than 500
GT in ocean service.
    (ii) All officer endorsements for master or mate (pilot) of towing
vessels for service on near-coastal waters, except apprentice mate
(steersman) of towing vessels.
    (iii) All officer endorsements for master or mate (pilot) of towing
vessels for service on Great Lakes, except apprentice mate (steersman)
of towing vessels.
    (iv) All officer endorsements as master or mate (pilot) of towing
vessels for service on inland waters or Western Rivers, except
apprentice mate (steersman) of towing vessels.
    (A) The Coast Guard will accept a Coast Guard-approved modified
basic firefighting course, which is the basic firefighting training
described in paragraph (h)(3) of this section modified to only cover
the equipment, fire prevention procedures, and firefighting operations
required on towing vessels on inland waters or Western Rivers routes
required in 46 CFR parts 140 and 142. A mariner who completes this
modified basic firefighting course will be issued an endorsement that
is restricted to inland waters or Western Rivers.
    (B) To increase in scope to Great Lakes, near-coastal or oceans,
the applicant will be required to complete the firefighting course
appropriate to the route sought.
* * * * *

    Dated: September 21, 2023.
W.R. Arguin,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Prevention
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-21560 Filed 10-2-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


MEMORANDUM

DATE:	March 23, 2015

TO:	Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket ID: OAR-2013-0602

FROM:	Rob Lawrence EPA/Region 6/PD

SUBJECT:	March 19, 2015 Presentation to a Louisiana environmental conference organized by the Louisiana Solid Waste Association.  The panel discussed the Proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants.

SUMMARY

      A panel presentation was made by EPA at a Louisiana environmental conference organized by the Louisiana Solid Waste Association.  The panel discussed the Proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants, which was proposed on June 2, 2014.  The meeting was in Lafayette, Louisiana.

ATTENDEES

Participants:	The conference was large and participants in individual sessions did not sign in.

EPA Participant:	Rob Lawrence (Region 6 Energy Policy Advisor)


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 43 (Monday, March 8, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13237-13239]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03991]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0113; Product Identifier 2017-SW-140-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2016-11-21 for Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (Airbus Helicopters)
Model EC135P1, EC135P2, EC135P2+, EC135T1, EC135T2, and EC135T2+
helicopters. AD 2016-11-21 requires revising the life limit of certain
parts and removing each part that has reached its life limit. Since the
FAA issued AD 2016-11-21, new models were certified. This proposed AD
would expand the applicability to include Model EC135P3 and EC135T3
helicopters. This proposed AD would also revise the life limits for
certain parts and propose to remove each part that has reached or
exceeded its life limit. The actions of this proposed AD are intended
to address an unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 22,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0113; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this proposed AD, the European Aviation Safety Agency (now European
Union Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) AD, any comments received and
other information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed
above. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed rule, contact
Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may
view this referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321,
Fort Worth, TX 76177.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Fuller, AD Program Manager,
Operational Safety Branch, Airworthiness Products Section, General
Aviation & Rotorcraft Unit, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX
76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2019-0113; Product Identifier
2017-SW-140-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regualtions.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposal.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Matt
Fuller, AD Program Manager, Operational Safety Branch, Airworthiness
Products Section, General Aviation & Rotorcraft Unit, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected] Any commentary that the FAA receives which is
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.

Discussion

    The FAA issued AD 2016-11-21, Amendment 39-18548 (81 FR 36137, June
6, 2016) (AD 2016-11-21) for Airbus Helicopters Model EC135P1, EC135P2,
EC135P2+, EC135T1,

EC135T2, and EC135T2+ helicopters. AD 2016-11-21 requires reducing the
life limit of certain parts and removing each part that has reached its
life limit. AD 2016-11-21 was prompted by Airbus Helicopters revising
the airworthiness limitations for the Model EC135 and EC635
helicopters' type design as published in the Master Servicing Manual
(MSM) EC135 Chapter 04--ALS documents. Revision 14 of the MSM contains
these new airworthiness limitations.
    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, issued EASA AD No. 2013-0178, dated August 7, 2013
(EASA AD 2013-0178), to correct an unsafe condition for Eurocopter
Deutschland GmbH (ECD) (now Airbus Helicopters) Model EC135P1, EC135P2,
EC135P2+, EC135T1, EC135T2, EC135T2+, EC635T1, EC635P2+, and EC635T2+
helicopters. EASA advises that ECD has revised the airworthiness
limitations for the EC135 and EC635 type design as published in the
MSM. Revision 14 of the MSM contains these new airworthiness
limitations. EASA states that failure to comply with these limitations
could result in failure of a critical part, which could result in loss
of control of the helicopter. Accordingly, EASA AD 2013-0178 requires
revising the airworthiness limitations section (ALS) to include the new
life limits and replacing each part that has reached its life limit.

Actions Since AD 2016-11-21 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2016-11-21, EASA issued EASA AD No. 2017-
0243, dated December 6, 2017 (EASA AD 2017-0243), which supersedes EASA
AD No. 2013-0178 and expands the applicability to include Models
EC135P3, EC135T3, EC635P3, and EC635T3 helicopters. New life limits
also were added for some parts. Model EC635P3 and EC635T3 helicopters
are not included in the applicability of this proposed AD as these
model helicopters are not FAA type-certificated.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by EASA and are approved for
operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral
agreement with the European Union, EASA has notified the FAA of the
unsafe condition described in its AD. The FAA is proposing this AD
after evaluating all known relevant information and determining that an
unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of
the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)
EC135-04A-012, Revision 0, dated September 11, 2017, which specifies
incorporating life limits for the tail rotor hub body into the tail
rotor hub log card and into the list of life-limited parts. Airbus
Helicopters reports the addition of the tail rotor hub body into the
tail rotor hub log card was prompted by a new, recently manufactured,
serial-numbered hub.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require, before further flight, establishing
a life limit for the tail rotor hub body of 27,400 hours time-in-
service (TIS) or using the service information if the history of the
tail rotor hub body is not known or cannot be identified. This proposed
AD would also require establishing life limits for certain swashplate
and mixing lever gear unit parts in the ALS, and recording the revised
life limit on the component history card or equivalent record.
Additionally, this proposed AD would require continuing to record the
life limit of certain parts that have not reached their life limit.
This proposed AD would require removing from service any part that
reached or exceeded its life limit.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA AD applies to Model EC635P2+, EC635P3, EC635T2+, and
EC635T3 helicopters, whereas this proposed AD would not because these
model helicopters are not FAA type-certificated. The EASA AD would
require revising the Aircraft Maintenance Program with new or revised
life limitations within 12 months after the EASA AD's effective date.
This proposed AD would require revising the life limit for certain
parts in the ALS of the existing maintenance manual for your helicopter
before further flight.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 272
helicopters of U.S. Registry. The FAA estimates that operators may
incur the following costs in order to comply with this proposed AD.
Labor costs are estimated at $85 per work-hour.
    Revising the component history card or equivalent record would take
about 2 work-hours, for an estimated cost of $170 per helicopter and
$46,240 for the U.S. fleet.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866,
    2. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016-11-21, Amendment 39-18548
(81 FR 36137); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH: Docket No. FAA-2019-0113;
Product Identifier 2017-SW-140-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This airworthiness directive (AD) applies to Airbus Helicopters
Deutschland GmbH Model EC135P1, EC135P2, EC135P2+, EC135P3, EC135T1,
EC135T2, EC135T2+, and EC135T3 helicopters, certificated in any
category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent certain parts from
remaining in service beyond their fatigue life, resulting in failure
of the part and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2016-11-21, Amendment 39-18548 (81 FR 36137,
June 6, 2016).

(d) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by April 22, 2021.

(e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(f) Required Actions

    (1) Before further flight, establish a life limit for the tail
rotor hub body (hub body), part number (P/N) L642A2003102, of 27,400
hours time-in-service (TIS). If you cannot determine the hub body's
TIS, follow the instructions in Table 1, Examples and Calculations,
Effectivity: The history of the hub body is not known or can't be
identified, in Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)
EC135-04A-012, Revision 0, dated September 11, 2017, except where
the service information specifies that you contact the manufacturer,
you are required to remove the part from service instead.
    (2) Before further flight, revise the life limit for each part
listed in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) and (ii) of this AD in the
Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) of the existing maintenance
manual for your helicopter and record the revised life limit on the
component history card or equivalent record as follows:
    (i) For swashplate parts:
    (A) The life limit for the ring (control ring), P/N
L623M2001213, is 10,700 hours TIS.
    (B) The life limit for the cardan ring (two-part), P/N
L623M2005205, is 14,300 hours TIS.
    (C) The life limit for the bolt (control ring), P/N
L671M7001215, is 14,300 hours TIS.
    (D) The life limit for the bolt (sliding sleeve), P/N
L623M2006206 and P/N L623M2006213, is 14,300 hours TIS.
    (ii) For mixing lever gear unit parts:
    (A) The life limit for the forked lever assembly, P/N
L671M3012102, is 10,400 hours TIS.
    (B) The life limit for the hinged support, P/N L671M7003210, is
8,400 hours TIS.
    (C) The life limit for the bolt, P/N L671M7001220, is 8,400
hours TIS.
    (3) Before further flight, remove from service any part listed
in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this AD that has reached or exceeded
its revised life limit.
    (4) Thereafter, for any part listed in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2)
of this AD that has not reached or exceeded its life limit, continue
to record the life limit of the part on its component history card
or equivalent record and remove any part listed in paragraph (f)(1)
and (2) of this AD from service before the part has reached or
exceeded its revised life limit.

 (g) Special Flight Permits

    Special flight permits are limited to a onetime flight to a
maintenance facility to replace a part that has reached its life
limit.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. If sending information directly to
the manager of the Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, send it to:
Manager, Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, FAA, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may
be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, the FAA suggests
that you notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office
or certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(i) Additional Information

    The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation Safety
Agency (now European Union Aviation Safety Agency) (EASA) AD No.
2017-0243, dated December 6, 2017. You may view the EASA AD on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov in the AD Docket.

(j) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6400, Tail Rotor
System.

    Issued on February 17, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-03991 Filed 3-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 23, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63302-63307]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24763]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0168]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 38 individuals
for exemption from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in
one eye for various reasons. The exemptions will enable these
individuals to operate commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate
commerce without meeting the prescribed vision requirement in one eye.
If granted, the exemptions would enable these individuals to qualify as
drivers of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 22, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0168 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket numbers for this notice. Note

that all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
Please see the Privacy Act heading below for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on January
17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for a 2-year period
if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety
that is equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved
absent such exemption.'' FMCSA can renew exemptions at the end of each
2-year period. The 38 individuals listed in this notice have each
requested such an exemption from the vision requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), which applies to drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce.
Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications of each
applicant to determine whether granting an exemption will achieve the
required level of safety mandated by statute.

Qualifications of Applicants

Ernest J. Bachman

    Mr. Bachman, age 50, has complete loss of vision in his right eye
due to a traumatic incident in 1975. The visual acuity in his right eye
is no light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an
examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``In my opinion he has
sufficient vision to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Bachman
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 32 years, accumulating
6,400 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 32 years,
accumulating 12,800 miles. He holds a Class A Commercial Driver's
License (CDL) from Pennsylvania. His driving record for the last 3
years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

A. Wayne Barker

    Mr. Barker, 70, has had a retinal detachment in his right eye since
2010. The visual acuity in his right eye is counting fingers, and in
his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his
ophthalmologist noted, ``In my medical opinion, Wayne has sufficient
vision to perform driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Barker reported that he has driven straight trucks for
52 years, accumulating 1.3 million miles, and tractor-trailer
combinations for 49 years, accumulating 2.2 million miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from Oklahoma. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Edgar G. Baxter

    Mr. Baxter, 74, has had a vascular occlusion in his left eye since
2010. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/30, and in his left eye,
20/200. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``I
certify that, in my medical opinion, this patient has sufficient vision
to operate a commercial motor vehicle.'' Mr. Baxter reported that he
has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 32 years, accumulating 4.16
million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Florida. His driving record
for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Jason W. Bowers

    Mr. Bowers, 26, has had Coat's disease in his right eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is no light perception,
and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his
optometrist noted, ``This patient has sufficient vision to perform the
driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Bowers
reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 3 years,
accumulating 75,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Oregon. His
driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions
for moving violations in a CMV.

Scott Brady

    Mr. Brady, 47, has had a central vein occlusion in his right eye
since 2010. The visual acuity in his right eye is light perception, and
in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his
optometrist noted, ``In my medical opinion, Mr. Brady has sufficient
vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Brady reported that he has driven straight trucks for 6
years, accumulating 108,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for
11 years, accumulating 198,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from
Florida. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Ronald A. Cleaver, Jr.

    Mr. Cleaver, 24, has had anisometropic amblyopia in his left eye
since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in
his left eye, 20/100. Following an examination in 2013, his
ophthalmologist noted, ``His current degree of peripheral vision and
good best-corrected acuity in his right eye should allow him to be safe
operating a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Cleaver reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 10 years, accumulating 17,500 miles, and
tractor-trailer combinations for 2 years, accumulating 2,000 miles. He
holds an operator's license from South Carolina. His driving record for
the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Eric V. DeFrancesco

    Mr. DeFrancesco, 35, has had aniosometropic amblyopia in his right
eye since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/60, and
in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his
ophthalmologist noted, ``It is my medical opinion within a reasonable
degree of medical certainty that he has sufficient visual ability to
perform all of the driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. DeFrancesco reported that he has driven straight trucks
for 5.5 years, accumulating 137,500 miles. He holds an operator's
license from Pennsylvania. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Matthew A. Eck

    Mr. Eck, 60, has had amblyopia in his right eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in his left eye, 20/
20. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``In
summary, Mr. Eck's amblyopia with his right eye is long-standing and
stable, and in my opinion, he has sufficient vision to perform the
driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Eck
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 37 years, accumulating
222,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

David E. Ferris

    Mr. Ferris, 70, has had complete loss of vision in his right eye
since 1991. The visual acuity in his right eye is no light perception,
and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his
ophthalmologist noted, ``I, therefore, certify that in my medical
opinion, the patient has sufficient vision to perform his driving tasks
to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Ferris reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 47.5 years, accumulating 1.19 million miles,
and tractor-trailer combinations for 10 years, accumulating 1 million
miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania. His driving record for
the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

George M. Hapchuk

    Mr. Hapchuk, 59, has had strabismic amblyopia in his left eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left
eye, 20/200. Following an examination in 2012, his optometrist noted,
``It is my impression that George Hapchuk has adequate vision to
perform the tasks to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Hapchuk
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 38 years, accumulating
1.2 million miles. He holds a Class BM CDL from Pennsylvania. His
driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions
for moving violations in a CMV.

James L. Hawthorne

    Mr. Hawthorne, 51, has a prosthetic right eye due to a traumatic
incident during childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is no
light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination
in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``James Hawthorne . . . truck driver .
. . Prosthetic right eye. The left eye's field is normal . . .
Applicant should be good to drive with appropriate head turn
adjustments and with caution.'' Mr. Hawthorne reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 32 years, accumulating 800,000 miles and
tractor-trailer combinations for 32 years, accumulating 1.12 million
miles. He holds a Class AM CDL from Texas. His driving record for the
last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations
in a CMV.

Johnny D. Ivey

    Mr. Ivey, 71, has had glaucoma in his left eye since childhood. The
visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, counting
fingers. Following an examination in 2013, his ophthalmologist noted,
``His visual defect is long standing (since childhood) in the left eye
and does not affect his ability to drive safely. He can drive a
commercial tractor trailer [sic].'' Mr. Ivey reported that he has
driven tractor-trailer combinations for 25 years, accumulating 1.42
million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from North Carolina. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and one conviction for a
moving violation in a CMV; he was following too closely.

Darryl H. Johnson

    Mr. Johnson, 50, has had a hemorrhage in his left eye for 40 years.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/15, and in his left eye, 20/
100. Following an examination in 2013, his ophthalmologist noted,
``Therefore, for the past 15 years, this patient has successfully
operated a commercial vehicle with 20/15 vision in the right eye and
less than 20/200 vision in the left eye. The current status of the left
eye is such that it is not likely that any form of visual
rehabilitation will be possible. So for the future, the patient will
operate with 20/15 vision in the right eye, and less than 20/200 vision
in the left eye, which has been successful for him with respect to his
operating a commercial vehicle for 15 years. This letter is to request
a waver [sic] for the visual requirements for binocular vision for this
particular patient, who has been quite successful with his current
level of vision which is expected to be stable in the future.'' Mr.
Johnson reported that he has driven straight trucks for 2 years,
accumulating 20,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 22
years, accumulating 3.3 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from West
Virginia. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

David Jones

    Mr. Jones, 49, has a prosthetic right eye due to a traumatic
incident during childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is no
light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination
in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``It is in my professional opinion that
Mr. Jones has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required
to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Jones reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 2.5 years, accumulating 25,000 miles. He
holds a Class B CDL from Florida. His driving record for the last 3
years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Thomas L. Kitchen

    Mr. Kitchen, 54, has been nearsighted in his right eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/300, and in his
left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2012, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``Even though Mr. Kitchen's vision does not meet normal
standards for a commercial driver's license, his vision has been in the
same range for many years and I believe that his vision is sufficient
for operating a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Kitchen reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 27 years, accumulating 2.36 million miles,
and tractor-trailer combinations for 27 years, accumulating 2.36
million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Virginia. His driving record
for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Wayne C. Knighton

    Mr. Knighton, 54, has had maculopathy in his right eye since 2009.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in his left eye, 20/
15. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``In my
medical opinion Mr. Knighton has sufficient vision to perform the
driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Knighton
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 30 years, accumulating
360,000 miles. He holds a Class B CDL from Nevada. His driving record
for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Brandon C. Koopman

    Mr. Koopman, 29, has aphakia and a corneal scar in his left eye due
to a traumatic incident during childhood. The visual acuity in his
right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, counting fingers. Following an
examination in 2013, his ophthalmologist noted, ``Vision is stable.
Vision in the left eye is limited due to long standing injury as a
child. Brandon has adapted to this and has functioned normally
throughout life. He has excellent eye health in his right eye.

While the ultimate decision rests on the DOT in my opinion Brandon has
sufficient visual capacity to perform driving tasks and operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Koopman reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 8 years, accumulating 4,000 miles. He holds an operator's
license from Nebraska. Her driving record for the last 3 years shows no
crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

David G. Lamborn

    Mr. Lamborn, 61, has had a branch retinal vein occlusion in his
left eye since 2003. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and
in his left eye, 20/50. Following an examination in 2013, his
optometrist noted, ``In my opinion, Mr. Lamborn presents with
sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Lamborn reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 1.5 years, accumulating 180,000 miles, tractor-trailer
combinations for 6 months, accumulating 12,000 miles, and buses for 2
years, accumulating 36,000 miles. He holds a Class AM CDL from North
Dakota. His driving record for the last 3 years shows one crash, for
which he was not cited and to which he did not contribute, and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Robert A. Marks

    Mr. Marks, 52, has had ocular toxoplasmosis in his left eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left
eye, 20/400. Following an examination in 2013, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``Mr. Marks has sufficient vision to perform driving tasks to
operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Marks reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 22 years, accumulating 44,000 miles. He holds an
operator's license from West Virginia. His driving record for the last
3 years shows no crashes and one conviction for a moving violation in a
CMV; he exceeded the speed limit by 10 mph.

Stephen R. Marshall

    Mr. Marshall, 47, has complete loss of vision in his right eye due
to a traumatic incident during childhood. The visual acuity in his
right eye is no light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following
an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``In my opinion, Mr.
Marshall does have sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Marshall reported that
he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 29 years, accumulating 5
million miles. He holds an operator's license from Mississippi. His
driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions
for moving violations in a CMV.

Edgar H. Meraz

    Mr. Meraz, 32, has had a macular hole in his left eye since 2004.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/15, and in his left eye, 20/
200. Following an examination in 2013, his ophthalmologist noted, ``I
believe that Mr. Meraz has sufficient vision to perform the driving
tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Meraz reported
that he has driven straight trucks for 14 years, accumulating 70,000
miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 12 years, accumulating
180,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from New Mexico. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

Ralph Reno

    Mr. Reno, 55, has had central serous retinopathy in his right eye
since 2003. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/50, and in his
left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2012, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``The Goldmann visual field shows a horizontal field of 140
degrees and vertical field of 130 degrees in the right and left eyes
individually and together. As such, his left eye is able to compensate
for the right eye so that his overall visual function is good and Mr.
Reno should be able to continue in his occupation driving a commercial
vehicle without restriction with his vision deficiency.'' Mr. Reno
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 26 years, accumulating
468,000 miles. He holds an operator's license from New Jersey. His
driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions
for moving violations in a CMV.

Glennis R. Reynolds

    Mr. Reynolds, 48, has a macular scar in his right eye due to a
traumatic incident in childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is
20/200, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013,
his optometrist noted, ``Based upon my findings and medical expertise,
I Ellen M. Grubb, O.D. hereby certify Glennis Reynolds to be visually
able to safely operate a commercial motor vehicle.'' Mr. Reynolds
reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 28 years,
accumulating 2.8 million miles. He holds a Class DMA CDL from Kentucky.
His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Joseph B. Saladino

    Mr. Saladino, 43, has had a retinal detachment in his left eye
since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in
his left eye, 20/300. Following an examination in 2013, his
ophthalmologist noted, ``I certify that the patient meets and/or
exceeds the visual requirements to perform driving tasks required to
operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Saladino reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 24 years, accumulating 960,000 miles, and
tractor-trailer combinations for 24 years, accumulating 960,000 miles.
He holds a Class A CDL from Florida. His driving record for the last 3
years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Carlos M. Saravia

    Mr. Saravia, 39, has a chorioretinal scar in his right eye due to a
traumatic injury during childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye
is 20/200, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in
2013, his ophthalmologist noted, ``In my professional opinion, I feel
that he has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to
operate a commercial vehicle at this time.'' Mr. Saravia reported that
he has driven straight trucks for 4 years, accumulating 32,000 miles.
He holds an operator's license from Maryland. His driving record for
the last 3 years shows no crashes and one conviction for a moving
violation in a CMV; he failed to obey instructions at a traffic control
device.

Glen M. Schulz

    Mr. Schulz, 64, has had amblyopia in his left eye since birth. The
visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/400.
Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``I believe
that his vision is sufficient to perform the driving tasks required to
operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Schulz reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 39 years, accumulating 682,500 miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from Iowa. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no
crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Steve W. Scott

    Mr. Scott, 50, has had amblyopia in his right eye since birth. The
visual acuity in his right eye is 20/70, and in his left eye, 20/20.
Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted that Mr. Scott
does not have any visual field defects or field loss that would affect
the safe operation of a commercial motor vehicle. Mr. Scott reported
that he has driven straight

trucks for 4 years, accumulating 28,000 miles, and tractor-trailer
combinations for 10 years, accumulating 70,000 miles. He holds a Class
A CDL from South Carolina. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Eugene D. Self, Jr.

    Mr. Self, 40, has had a prosthetic left eye since 1979. The visual
acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, no light
perception. Following an examination in 2013, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``Mr. Self's visual impairment does not compromise his ability
to drive a commercial motor vehicle.'' Mr. Self reported that he has
driven buses for 7.5 years, accumulating 13,125 miles. He holds a Class
C CDL from North Carolina. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Darren B. Shields

    Mr. Shields, 54, has had amblyopia in his left eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/
80. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``In my
medical opinion this patient has sufficient vision and agility to
perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.''
Mr. Shields reported that he has driven straight trucks for 3 years,
accumulating 162,000 miles, and buses for 8 years, accumulating 96,000
miles. He holds a Class BM CDL from Nevada. His driving record for the
last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations
in a CMV.

Roye T. Skelton

    Mr. Skelton, 45, has had a traumatic cataract in his right eye
since 2006. The visual acuity in his right eye is counting fingers, and
in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2013, his
optometrist noted, ``If proceeding with caution, in my opinion there is
no reason this patient can not safely drive. However, it will be up to
the discretion of the waiver committee to make the final decision.''
Mr. Skelton reported that he has driven straight trucks for 18 years,
accumulating 561,600 miles. He holds an operator's license from
Mississippi. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Robert D. Smienski

    Mr. Smienski, 55, has a prosthetic right eye due to a traumatic
incident during childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is no
light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination
in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``Upon conclusion of the exam, I find
that Mr. Smienski has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks to
operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Smienski reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 18 years, accumulating 540,000 miles. He
holds an operator's license from Ohio. His driving record for the last
3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Justin T. Swires

    Mr. Swires, 48, has a corneal scar in his left eye due to a
traumatic incident in 1984. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/
15, and in his left eye, counting fingers. Following an examination in
2013, his optometrist noted, ``He judges depth very well using
monocular clues, and in my opinion has sufficient vision capabilities
to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Swires reported that he has driven straight trucks for
31 years, accumulating 620,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations
for 31 years, accumulating 3.1 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL
from Wyoming. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Robert Thomas

    Mr. Thomas, 48, has Commotio Retinae in his left eye due to a
traumatic incident in 1985. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/
20, and in his left eye, counting fingers. Following an examination in
2013, his optometrist noted, ``His central vision loss in the left eye
can be compensated for by the right eye. Therefore, in my medical
opinion, I feel his vision is sufficient to perform the driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Thomas reported that he
has driven straight trucks for 23 years, accumulating 115,000 miles,
and tractor-trailer combinations for 23 years, accumulating 1.27
million miles. He holds a Class AM CDL from Pennsylvania. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

Clifford B. Thompson, Jr.

    Mr. Thompson, 48, has a prosthetic right eye due to a traumatic
incident in 2010. The visual acuity in his right eye is no light
perception, and in his left eye, 20/25. Following an examination in
2013, his optometrist noted, ``Field is stable . . . color vision is
normal . . . I believe he is qualified for commercial driving.'' Mr.
Thompson reported that he has driven straight trucks for 18 years,
accumulating 237,600 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 6
years, accumulating 288,000 miles. He holds an operator's license from
South Carolina. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no
crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Donald L. Urmston

    Mr. Urmston, 50, has had ocular histoplasmosis in his left eye
since 1999. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his
left eye, counting fingers. Following an examination in 2013, his
optometrist noted, ``In my opinion, since Donald has 20/20 vision in
one eye and good peripheral vision temporally in each eye, his vision
is sufficient to drive a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Urmston reported
that he has driven straight trucks for 4 years, accumulating 200,000
miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 25 years, accumulating 1.25
million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio. His driving record for
the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Steven M. Veloz

    Mr. Veloz, 57, has had amblyopia in his left eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/
100. Following an examination in 2012, his optometrist noted, ``In my
medical opinion, I feel that Steven Veloz has sufficient vision to
perform the driving tasks equired [sic] to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Veloz reported that he has driven straight trucks for 35
years, accumulating 1.93 million miles, and tractor-trailer
combinations for 35 years, accumulating 2.5 million miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from California. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Stephen H. Ward

    Mr. Ward, 66, has had amblyopia in his right eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/400, and in his left eye, 20/
20. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``In my
professional opinion, Mr. Ward has sufficient vision to perform the
driving task required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Ward
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 40 years, accumulating
500,000 miles, tractor-trailer combinations for 2 years, accumulating
6,000 miles, and buses for 4 years, accumulating 40,000 miles. He holds
a Class A CDL from Missouri. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows

no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Janusz K. Wis

    Mr. Wis, 31, has had amblyopia in his right eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/70, and in his left eye, 20/
20. Following an examination in 2013, his optometrist noted, ``In my
opinion your vision seems to be stable and you have sufficient vision
in the left eye to be able to perform the driving tasks required to
operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Wis reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 7 years, accumulating 21,000 miles, and tractor-
trailer combinations for 7 years, accumulating 21,000 miles. He holds a
Class AM CDL from Illinois. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. The Agency will consider all comments
received before the close of business November 22, 2013. Comments will
be available for examination in the docket at the location listed under
the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Agency will file comments
received after the comment closing date in the public docket, and will
consider them to the extent practicable.
    In addition to late comments, FMCSA will also continue to file, in
the public docket, relevant information that becomes available after
the comment closing date. Interested persons should monitor the public
docket for new material.

Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket number FMCSA-2013-0168 and click
the search button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue
``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand side of the page. On the new
page, enter information required including the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of
the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number
FMCSA-2013-0168 and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket
Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments related to the
proposed rulemaking.

    Issued on: September 24, 2013.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-24763 Filed 10-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 194 (Friday, October 7, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60893-60895]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21950]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0833]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Puget Sound, Tacoma, WA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is extending the effective period of a
temporary, 500-yard radius, moving security zone for a vessel carrying
Certain Dangerous Cargo (CDC) within Puget Sound. This temporary
security zone is needed to protect the vessel, the CDC, and the
surrounding waterway from terrorist acts, sabotage, or other subversive
acts, accidents, or other events of a similar nature. Entry of vessels
or persons into this zone is prohibited while the Motor Vessel (M/V)
GREEN RIDGE is in transit unless specifically authorized by the Captain
of the Port Puget Sound (COTP) or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from October 5,
2022, through October 8, 2022. For the purposes of enforcement, actual
notice will be used from October 4, 2022, until 8:45 a.m. on October 5,
2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Rob Nakama, Sector Puget Sound Waterways Management
Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Puget Sound
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
M/V Motor Vessel
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On September 30, 2022, the Coast Guard issued a rulemaking that
created a temporary security zone effective October 4, 2022. Due to the
vessel's new departure date, additional time is needed; as a result,
the Coast Guard is establishing through temporary regulations a
security zone that will be in effect through October, 8, 2022. The
temporary rule was issued without prior notice and opportunity to
comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an
agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment
when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are
``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.''
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists
for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect
to this rule because it is impracticable. The Coast Guard established
this security zone to ensure security of the vessel, the CDC, and the
surrounding waterway from terrorist acts, sabotage, or other subversive
acts, accidents, or other events of a similar nature and the effective
date of the zone must be extended due to the vessel's new departure
date. It would be contrary to public interest to postpone extending the
temporary security zone.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable because the security zone is needed
for immediate action to respond to potential security concerns
associated with the vessel.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The COTP has determined that
potential hazards associated with the transit of the M/V GREEN RIDGE
when loaded will be a security concern within a 500-yard radius of the
vessel. This rule is needed to provide for the safety and security the
vessel, its cargo, and surrounding waterway from terrorist acts,
sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other events of a
similar nature while the vessel is transiting within Puget Sound.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a 500-yard radius temporary moving
security zone around the M/V GREEN RIDGE. The zone for the vessel is
effective from October 4, 2022, through October 8, 2022. It will be
subject to enforcement this entire period unless the COTP determines it
is no longer needed, in which case the Coast Guard will inform mariners
via Notice to Mariners. The duration of the zone is intended to protect
the vessel, the cargo, and the surrounding waterway from terrorist
acts, sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other events of
a similar nature. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the
security zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a
designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
duration, and location of the security zone. This rule will impact a
small designated area of 500-yards around the moving vessel while
transiting from Terminal 7 in Tacoma, WA, to Admiralty Inlet, WA.
Moreover, the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.

605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
security zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a moving security zone lasting for the
duration of time that the M/V GREEN RIDGE is transiting while loaded
with cargo. It will prohibit entry within a 500 yard radius of the M/V
GREEN RIDGE while the vessel is transiting loaded within Puget Sound.
It is categorically excluded from further review under L60(d) in
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A
record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T13-0833 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T13-0833  Security Zone; Puget Sound, Tacoma, WA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a security zone: All navigable
waters encompassing a 500-yard radius around the Motor Vessel (M/V)
GREEN RIDGE while the vessel is underway from Terminal 7 in Tacoma, WA,
until the vessel reaches a pier in Admiralty Bay, WA.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Puget Sound (COTP) in the enforcement of the
security zone.
    (c) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from October
4, 2022, through October 8, 2022.
    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations in Sec.  165.33 apply.
Entry into the zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a
designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative by VHF Channel 16 or at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Those in the
security zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to
them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
    (3) If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply
with the instructions of the COTP or designated representative.
    (e) Information broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative
will inform the public through Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs),
Local Notices to Mariners (LNMs), and/or Marine Safety Information
Bulletins (MSIBs) as appropriate of the enforcement times and dates for
the security zone. The security zone may be suspended early at the
discretion of the COTP.

    Dated: October 4, 2022.
P.M. Hilbert,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2022-21950 Filed 10-5-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P