ATTACHMENT H:

Response to EPA on ICR Burden Consultation

(Record of Consultation Correspondence)

From:

"SCHNEIDER, RUSSELL P"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Subject:

RE: ICR for Tolerance Petitions

Anthony,

The only thing I would correct is the last sentence of the abstract.
It should say "exemption from the requirement of a tolerance" not "to
have a tolerance".

I can not comment on the estimated costs, but would agree they have
increased.  Regardless, the action, either a tolerance request, or the
request for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance, must be
completed and must be completed in a manner acceptable to the EPA.  I
don't see how this can be confrontational.

Russ

From:

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Subject:

FW: ICR for Tolerance Petitions

Dear Anthony,

Sorry for the delay in getting this back to you; I was working on it ast
week - & somehow lost the comments that I had added to the file. y
comments have been inserted into the document using the WordPerfect
comment function (i.e., when you see the gray GRW, my comments are
included there).

As far as the cost estimates, I think that these are in line with
current costs.  In fact, yesterday when I was attending the Southern
Weed Science Society meeting I was told  that IR-4 budgets about
$110,000 for a residue trial series for a commodity.  I think the caveat
comment that the cost that you list is an average is important, as a
crop grouping petition would be more costly than a single crop & some
methods cost more than others to run for the analytical phase.

Hope this helps . . .

Best Regards,

Greg Watson

State Regulatory Affairs & Federal Label Support Team Lead

Syngenta Regulatory Affairs

ph<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> ext 2993

mobile<PHONE_NUMBER>

fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

From:

Dan Kunkel<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Subject:

RE: ICR for Tolerance Petitions

Dear Anthony,

Please note that by in large IR-4 only conducts and submits Residue
studies to EPA.  I have reviewed your table 1, 2, and 3 for Annual
Respondent Burden/Cost Estimates.  I feel that these tables are
accurate.  Considering that IR-4 submits approximately half of all
petitions submitted to EPA each year would indicate that we submit
approximately 75 of the average number of 150 petitions per year.
Considering that the IR-4 budget received from USDA in 2005 was $14.9
(CSREES and ARS) Million then removing monies for other programs like
ornamentals etc.  Our Residue program is around $10 Million which is
very close to half of your total annual cost ($23,973,150, Table 3
Petitioners Cost).  Although IR-4 studies often require fewer field
trials, we often provide a greater number of studies in each petition.
Therefore, again I feel that the numbers you provided are comparable to
IR-4 overall cost.

Thanks for requesting our input.

Dan

Daniel Kunkel, Ph.D.

IR-4 Program, Rutgers University

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
732/932-9575 x616#

http://ir4.rutgers.edu/


[Federal Register: March 31, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 61)]
[Notices]
[Page 16098]
[DOCID:fr31mr10-62]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-903-000]

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

March 24, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Patriot Power LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 13, 2010.
    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-referenced proceeding 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>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-7139 Filed 3-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Technical Appendices

For

Redesignation Request,

Maintenance Plan

and 2002 Base Year Inventory

Berks County

 Ozone Nonattainment Area

January 2007

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Department of Environmental Protection

Bureau of Air Quality

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Appendix A:  	Stationary Point Sources

A-1  	Methodology – Preparation of Pennsylvania Point Source Inventories and Instructions for Completing the Annual Emissions Reporting Forms

A-2  	Facility Annual Emissions by SCC

A-3	Facility Daily Emissions by SCC

A-4	Banked Emission Reduction Credits

	Appendix B:  	Stationary Area Sources

B-1    	Pennsylvania 2002 Area Source Criteria Air Pollutant Emission Estimation Methods (EH Pechan, Feb. 2004)

B-2	Area Source Annual Emissions by SCC

B-3	Area Source Daily Emissions by SCC

	Appendix C:  	Highway Vehicles  (includes Executive Summary)

C-1   	Mobile Source Highway Emissions Inventory – An Explanation of Methodology

C-2	Berks County Highway Emissions Estimates

2002 Annual and Daily CO, NOx, VOC & VMT by SCC; Daily NOx, VOC and VMT by Facility and Vehicle Type.

2004, 2009, 2018 Daily VOC, NOx and VMT by Facility Type, Vehicle Type and SCC; Daily CO by SCC

C-3   	MOBILE6.2 Input Parameter Summary

C-4	MOBILE6.2 Sample Input File

C-5	Traffic Growth Forecasting System Report

	Appendix D:  	Nonroad Sources

D-1	Emissions Estimation Methodology

D-2	Nonroad Source Emissions by Category and SCC

	Appendix E:	Source Emissions Projection Methodology


[Federal Register: April 14, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 70)]
[Notices]
[Page 17243-17245]
[DOCID:fr14ap09-118]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59717; File No. SR-FINRA-2009-021]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change To Codify the Extended Hours Trading Risk
Disclosure Obligation as New FINRA Rule 2265

April 7, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 27, 2009, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II [sic], which Items have been prepared by FINRA. FINRA has designated
the proposed rule change as ``constituting a stated policy, practice,
or interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or
enforcement of an existing rule'' under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the
Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(1) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FINRA is proposing to adopt new FINRA Rule 2265 (Extended Hours
Trading Risk Disclosure) to codify the existing obligation to disclose
to customers the risks of extended hours trading. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web site at http://
www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA and at the Commission's
Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    On January 10, 2000, FINRA, then NASD, filed with the SEC a Notice
to Members reminding members of their obligation under just and
equitable principles of trade \5\ and the advertising rule \6\ to
disclose to all customers the material risks of extended hours trading
(i.e., trading outside regular trading

hours of 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern Standard Time).\7\ In its filing
with the Commission, FINRA noted that, while the growth of extended
hours trading provides customers with greater opportunities to trade
securities and manage their portfolios, it also involves material risks
that are specific to extended hours trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Rule 2010 (Standards of Commercial Honor and Principles of
Trade).
    \6\ NASD Rule 2210 (Communications with the Public).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42363 (January 28,
2000), 65 FR 5715 (February 4, 2000) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to a Notice to
Members on Extended Hours Trading) (SR-NASD 00-01) (``NTM 00-07'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NTM 00-07 provided a model extended hours risk disclosure statement
for retail and institutional customers that addressed six primary
trading risks: (1) Lower liquidity; (2) higher volatility; (3) changing
prices; (4) unlinked markets; (5) an exaggerated effect from news
announcements; and (6) wider spreads. This disclosure statement defined
certain essential terminology (e.g., ``liquidity,'' ``volatility,'' and
``spread'') and explained the risks that are present during extended
hours trading, specifically:
     Risk of Lower Liquidity. Liquidity refers to the ability
of market participants to buy and sell securities. Generally, the more
orders that are available in a market, the greater the liquidity.
Liquidity is important because with greater liquidity it is easier for
investors to buy or sell securities, and as a result, investors are
more likely to pay or receive a competitive price for securities
purchased or sold. There may be lower liquidity in extended hours
trading as compared to regular market hours. As a result, your order
may only be partially executed, or not at all.
     Risk of Higher Volatility. Volatility refers to the
changes in price that securities undergo when trading. Generally, the
higher the volatility of a security, the greater its price swings.
There may be greater volatility in extended hours trading than in
regular market hours. As a result, your order may only be partially
executed, or not at all, or you may receive an inferior price in
extended hours trading than you would during regular market hours.
     Risk of Changing Prices. The prices of securities traded
in extended hours trading may not reflect the prices either at the end
of regular market hours, or upon the opening the next morning. As a
result, you may receive an inferior price in extended hours trading
than you would during regular market hours.
     Risk of Unlinked Markets. Depending on the extended hours
trading system or the time of day, the prices displayed on a particular
extended hours trading system may not reflect the prices in other
concurrently operating extended hours trading systems dealing in the
same securities. Accordingly, you may receive an inferior price in one
extended hours trading system than you would in another extended hours
trading system.
     Risk of News Announcements. Normally, issuers make news
announcements that may affect the price of their securities after
regular market hours. Similarly, important financial information is
frequently announced outside of regular market hours. In extended hours
trading, these announcements may occur during trading, and if combined
with lower liquidity and higher volatility, may cause an exaggerated
and unsustainable effect on the price of a security.
     Risk of Wider Spreads. The spread refers to the difference
in price between what you can buy a security for and what you can sell
it for. Lower liquidity and higher volatility in extended hours trading
may result in wider than normal spreads for a particular security.
    In addition, FINRA notes that certain regulatory protections are
not in effect after the end of ``regular trading hours'' on any trading
day. For example, the SEC's Regulation NMS's ``trade-through'' rules do
not apply to executions after 4 p.m. EST.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ A trade-through occurs when one trading center executes an
order at a price that is inferior to the price of a protected
quotation. See 17 CFR 242.600(77).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA is proposing to transfer this existing disclosure obligation
into new FINRA Rule 2265 (Extended Hours Trading Risk Disclosure) for
administrative and ease of reference purposes. As is currently the
case, members would retain a measure of flexibility in the wording of
the risk disclosure (so long as, at a minimum, the above six areas are
addressed). In addition to the above specific disclosures, members must
include any additional disclosures as are relevant and appropriate to
the member's business consistent with their obligations under just and
equitable principles of trade.
    As noted in Item 2 of this filing, FINRA has filed the proposed
rule change for immediate effectiveness. The effective date and the
implementation date will be the date of filing, March 27, 2009.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\9\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA continues to believe that members that permit customers to
engage in extended hours trading have an obligation to disclose to such
customers the risks specific to extended hours trading. Similarly,
members that advertise the opportunities and benefits of extended hours
trading must also disclose the material risks. FINRA believes that this
disclosure requirement is an important element in protecting investors
and informing investors of the risks specific to extended hours
trading.

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

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

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and paragraph (f)(1) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\11\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(x).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2009-021 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2009-021. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2009-021 and should be
submitted on or before May 5, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-8420 Filed 4-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3552-3554]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1390]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0365]

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 thirteen
individuals for exemption from the vision requirement in the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. If granted, the exemptions would
enable these individuals to qualify as drivers of commercial motor
vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce without meeting the Federal
vision requirement.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 23, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0365 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 FDMS published in
the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical Program
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 thirteen 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

Daniel C. Berry

    Mr. Berry, age 46, has had a prosthetic right eye due to a
traumatic injury sustained in childhood. The best corrected visual
acuity in left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his
optometrist noted, ``Mr. Berry has sufficient vision to perform the
driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Berry
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 27 years, accumulating
540,000 miles and tractor-trailer combinations for 27 years,
accumulating 540,000 miles. He holds a Class A Commercial Driver's
License (CDL) from Arkansas. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
Commercial Motor Vehicle (CMV).

Jeffrey H. Bohr

    Mr. Bohr, 42, has had a prosthetic left eye due to a traumatic
injury sustained in 1987. The best corrected visual acuity in his right
eye is 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his optometrist noted,
``As previously stated Mr. Bohr has completely normal vision in his
right eye and should be able to perform

driving tasks in a commercial vehicle safely.'' Mr. Bohr reported that
he has driven straight trucks for 7 years, accumulating 385,000 miles.
He holds a Class B CDL from Iowa. His driving record for the last 3
years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

William J. Byron

    Mr. Byron, 66, has had a macular scar in his right eye due to a
traumatic injury sustained in 1977. The best corrected visual acuity in
his right eye is 20/125 and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an
examination in 2011, his ophthalmologist noted, ``Based on his history
and my clinical exams for nearly two years, it is my opinion that Mr.
Byron has sufficient vision to safely drive a commercial vehicle.'' Mr.
Byron reported that he has driven straight trucks for 10 years,
accumulating 120,000 miles and tractor-trailer combinations for 27
years, accumulating 2.295 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from
North Carolina. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no
crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Michael P. Callihan

    Mr. Callihan, 49, has had amblyopia in his right eye since
childhood. The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/70
and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his
optometrist noted, ``Upon review of Mr. Callihan's test results I
believe that in my medical opinion, he has sufficient vision to perform
the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr.
Callihan reported that he has driven straight trucks for 20 years,
accumulating 150,000 miles. He holds a Class B CDL from Ohio. His
driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions
for moving violations in a CMV.

John Edmondson

    Mr. Edmondson, 66, has had amblyopia in left eye since childhood.
The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/400 and in his
left eye, 20/25. Following an examination in 2011, his optometrist
noted, ``In my medical opinion Mr. Edmondson has sufficient vision to
perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.''
Mr. Edmondson reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations
for 37 years, accumulating 925,000 miles. He holds a Class D operator's
license from Alabama. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no
crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Richard P. Frederiksen

    Mr. Frederiksen, 29, has had a prosthesis left eye since age 3 due
to a traumatic injury. The best corrected visual acuity in his right
eye is 20/120. Following an examination in 2011, his optometrist noted,
``In my professional opinion, Mr. Frederiksen has sufficient vision to
perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.''
Mr. Frederiksen reported that he has driven tractor-trailer
combinations for 11 years, accumulating 550,000 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.

Stephen J. Hall

    Mr. Hall, 46, has had amblyopia in his right eye due since
childhood. The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/150
and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his
optometrist noted, ``I certify that Stephen James Hall, in my medical
opinion, has sufficient vision at this point in time to perform the
driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Hall
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 22 years, accumulating
1.1 million miles and tractor-trailer combinations for 22 years,
accumulating 1.65 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from
Washington. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Lonnie B. Hicks, Jr.

    Mr. Hicks, 33, has had congenial optic atrophy in his right eye
since birth. The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is hand
motion vision and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in
2011, his optometrist noted, ``Mr. Hicks has had this condition since
birth and has sufficient vision to continue operating a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Hicks reported that he has driven straight trucks for 15
years, accumulating 270,000 miles and tractor-trailer combinations for
15 years, accumulating 198,000. He holds a Class D operator's license
from Oklahoma. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Samuel V. Holder

    Mr. Holder, 61, has had ocular hypertension in his right eye since
2009 and retinal detachment in his left eye since 2006. The best
corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20 and in his left eye,
20/200. Following an examination in 2011, his ophthalmologist noted,
``I felt his vision was good enough to drive a commercial or personal
vehicle. I certify his vision is good enough to do this.'' Mr. Holder
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 10 years, accumulating
200,000 miles and tractor-trailer combinations for 41 years,
accumulating 3.5 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.
His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Timothy L. Klompien

    Mr. Klompien, 51, has had a retina detachment in his right eye due
to a traumatic injury sustained in 2006. The best corrected visual
acuity in his right eye is 20/200 and in his left eye, 20/20. Following
an examination in 2011, his ophthalmologist noted, ``I feel he has
sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Klompien reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 5 years, accumulating 150,000 miles and tractor-trailer
combinations for 15 years, accumulating 1.05 million miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from Montana. His driving record for the last 3 years shows
no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Jerry L. Pettijohn

    Mr. Pettijohn, 62, has had cataracts in his right eye since 1987.
The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is hand motion vision
and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his
optometrist noted, ``I certify that in my medical opinion, Jerry
Pettijohn does have sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle and should qualify for a
vision exemption.'' Mr. Pettijohn reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 44 years, accumulating 880,000 miles and tractor-trailer
combinations for 17 years, accumulating 935,000 miles and buses for 5
years accumulating 25,000 miles. He holds a Class D operator's license
from Oklahoma. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Jake Richter

    Mr. Richter, 27, has had corneal scarring in his left eye since
1999. The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20 and in
his left eye, 20/400. Following an examination in 2011, his optometrist
noted, ``My medical opinion is that Mr. Richter has sufficient vision
to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Richter reported that he has driven straight trucks for
12 years,

accumulating 9,000 miles and tractor-trailer combinations for 3 years,
accumulating 18,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Kansas. His
driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions
for moving violations in a CMV.

Bradley S. Sanders

    Mr. Sanders, 43, has had amblyopia in his left eye since birth. The
best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20 and in his left
eye, 20/60. Following an examination in 2011, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``At this time, given Mr. Bradley Sanders' visual acuity
bilaterally, the patient has sufficient vision to perform the driving
tasks to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Sanders reported that he
has driven straight trucks for 8 years, accumulating 21,840 miles. He
holds a Class D operator's license from New Mexico. 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 February 23, 2012. 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.

    Issued on: January 13, 2012.
 Larry W. Minor,
 Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-1390 Filed 1-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P