[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 203 (Friday, October 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53060-53061]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22814]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OLEM-2018-0391, FRL-9984-90-OEI]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; Facility Ground-Water Monitoring
Requirements (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Facility Ground-Water Monitoring
Requirements (EPA ICR Number 0959.16, OMB Control Number 2050-0033), to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through October 31,
2018. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal
Register on July 3, 2018 during a 60-day comment period. This notice
allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden
and cost to the public. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before November 19,
2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-
2018-0391, to (1) EPA, either online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to:
RCRA Docket (2822T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to
[email protected]. Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Vyas, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) creates a comprehensive program for the safe management of
hazardous waste. Section 3004 of RCRA requires owners and operators of
facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste to comply
with standards established by EPA that are to protect the environment.
Section 3005 provides for implementation of these standards under
permits issued to owners and operators by EPA or authorized States.
Section 3005 also allows owners and operators of facilities in
existence when the regulations came into effect to comply with
applicable notice requirements to operate until a permit is issued or
denied. This statutory authorization to operate prior to permit
determination is commonly known as ``interim status.'' Owners and
operators of interim status facilities also must comply with standards
set under Section 3004.

    This ICR examines the ground-water monitoring standards for
permitted and interim status facilities at 40 CFR parts 264 and 265, as
specified. The ground-water monitoring requirements for regulated units
follow a tiered approach whereby releases of hazardous contaminants are
first detected (detection monitoring), then confirmed (compliance
monitoring), and if necessary, are required to be cleaned up
(corrective action). Each of these tiers requires collection and
analysis of ground-water samples. Owners or operators that conduct
ground-water monitoring are required to report information to the
oversight agencies on releases of contaminants and to maintain records
of ground-water monitoring data at their facilities. The goal of the
ground-water monitoring program is to prevent and quickly detect
releases of hazardous contaminants to groundwater, and to establish a
program whereby any contamination is expeditiously cleaned up as
necessary to protect human health and environment.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Business or other for-profit; and
State, Local, or Tribal Governments.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (RCRA Sections 3004
and 3005).
    Estimated number of respondents: 813.
    Frequency of response: quarterly, semi-annually, and annually.
    Total estimated burden: 136,258 hours per year. Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $25,524,890 (per year), includes $20,411,396
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 19,231 hours in
the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This increase is due to an increase in the respondent
for permitted facilities.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-22814 Filed 10-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: April 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 83)]
[Notices]
[Page 23280-23281]
[DOCID:fr29ap08-113]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57702; File No. SR-CBOE-2008-48]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Regarding the Handling of Odd-lot Orders on the CBOE Stock
Exchange

April 23, 2008.
    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 April 22, 2008, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially
prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated this proposal as
one effecting a change in an existing order-entry or trading system
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(5) thereunder,\4\ which renders it 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)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to change CBOE Stock Exchange (``CBSX'') Rule
52.8, which governs the handling of odd-lot orders. The text of the
proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's principal office,
the Commission's Public Reference Room, and http://www.cboe.com.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to revise CBSX Rule
52.8, which governs the handling of odd-lot orders. Currently, a
marketable odd-lot order received by CBSX is executed against the best
price being displayed by CBSX Market-Makers. As proposed, an odd-lot
order (including the odd-lot portion of a mixed-lot order) received by
CBSX would be displayed to CBSX Traders for a period of time not to
exceed one second as determined by CBSX. The exposure would also
include information regarding the applicable NBBO price for that
product. Responses to trade against the odd-lot order could be
submitted only at the applicable NBBO price or better and would have to
be for the full size of the odd-lot order. The first CBSX Trader to
respond would trade against the odd-lot order. If no responses are
received, then the order would trade against the best price being
displayed by a CBSX Market-Maker. If the odd-lot order has a limit
price that is not marketable, it would be entered into an odd-lot order
book, where CBSX Traders may submit orders to trade against resting
interest. A final feature of the proposal is that odd-lot order senders
would be able to specify that, if an NBBO execution is not attainable,
the order should be cancelled. The Exchange believes this new method
for handling odd-lot orders will result in better executions for odd-
lots orders.

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act \5\ in general and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \6\ in particular in that, by offering
opportunities for price improvement for odd-lot orders, it is designed
to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition 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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has designated this proposal as effecting a change in
an existing order-entry or trading system that: (i) Does not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (iii) does not have the effect of limiting the access to or
availability of the system, thereby qualifying this proposal for filing
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \7\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(5)
thereunder,\8\ which renders the proposal effective upon filing with
the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.

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 No. SR-CBOE-2008-48 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2008-48. 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 Commissions 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 the Exchange. 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-CBOE-2008-48 and should be submitted on
or before May 20, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-9305 Filed 4-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 67 (Friday, April 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 20815]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8302]

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

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: ER10-2819-001
    Applicants: ALLETE, Inc.
    Description: Allete, Inc submits Midwest ISO MBR Process Document.
    Filed Date: 3/23/12
    Accession Number: 20120328-0010
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/13/12

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1131-000
    Applicants: Parkview AMC Energy, LLC
    Description: Additional Information to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 3/29/12
    Accession Number: 20120329-5107
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/19/12

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1379-000
    Applicants: Cleco Power LLC
    Description: Cleco Power 2012 Rate Case (Part 2 of 2) to be
effective 6/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/29/12
    Accession Number: 20120329-5000
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/19/12

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1380-000
    Applicants: PacifiCorp
    Description: Termination of Alpental Non-Conforming PTP Agmt
(Skyline) to be effective 5/29/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/29/12
    Accession Number: 20120329-5088
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/19/12

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1381-000
    Applicants: Robbins Energy, LLC
    Description: Cancellation of Tariff to be effective 3/29/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/29/12
    Accession Number: 20120329-5091
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/19/12

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1382-000
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., New England Power Pool
Participants Committee
    Description: Rev. to FCM Rules Related to Supplemental Availability
Bilaterals to be effective 6/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/29/12
    Accession Number: 20120329-5102
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/19/12

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1383-000
    Applicants: Diamond State Generation Partners, LLC
    Description: Market-Based Rate Application to be effective 3/29/
2012.
    Filed Date: 3/29/12
    Accession Number: 20120329-5124
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/19/12

    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
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: March 29, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-8302 Filed 4-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 210 (Wednesday, October 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65034-65038]
[FR Doc No: 2013-25798]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0190]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
Mellitus

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 25 individuals
for exemptions from the prohibition against persons with insulin-
treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) operating commercial motor vehicles
(CMVs) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable
these individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 29, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0190 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 9a.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 Federal Docket Management System (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.'' The statute also allows the Agency to renew
exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The 25 individuals listed
in this notice have recently requested such an exemption from the
diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), which applies to drivers
of CMVs in interstate commerce. Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate
the qualifications of each applicant to determine whether granting the
exemption will achieve the required level of safety mandated by
statute.

Qualifications of Applicants

Phyllis J. Cameron

    Ms. Cameron, 67, has had ITDM since 2008. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2013 and certified that she has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Cameron understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of her diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Cameron meets the
vision requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her optometrist examined
her in 2013 and certified that she does not have diabetic retinopathy.
She holds a Class B CDL from Indiana.

Jarrid S. Childress

    Mr. Childress, 32, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Childress understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Childress meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Kentucky.

James M. Costello

    Mr. Costello, 35, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Costello understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Costello meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Indiana.

Gary L. Crawford

    Mr. Crawford, 54, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no

severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness,
requiring the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired
cognitive function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months
and no recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5
years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Crawford understands
diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes
using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Crawford meets
the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio.

Roger D. Droog

    Mr. Droog, 67, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Droog understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Droog meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.

Clair H. Gilmore

    Mr. Gilmore, 67, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Gilmore understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gilmore meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2013 and certified that he has stable
non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Washington.

Reuben L. Hunter, Jr.

    Mr. Hunter, 70, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hunter understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hunter meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Virginia.

Michael A. Kollos

    Mr. Kollos, 38, has had ITDM since 1987. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Kollos understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kollos meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in
2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds
a Class B CDL from Minnesota.

Daniel R. Lindahl

    Mr. Lindahl, 28, has had ITDM since 1992. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Lindahl understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Lindahl meets the
vision requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Wisconsin.

Kenneth G. Mahan, Jr.

    Mr. Mahan, 69, has had ITDM since 2002. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Mahan understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Mahan meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him
in 2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds a Class D Operator's license from Alabama.

Jason L. Martin

    Mr. Martin, 31, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Martin understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Martin meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

James F. McSweeney

    Mr. McSweeney, 65, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. McSweeney understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. McSweeney meets the
vision requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has stable,

non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an Operator's license
from New Hampshire.

Eric W. Miller

    Mr. Miller, 51 has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Miller understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Miller meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in
2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds
a Class A CDL from Indiana.

Thomas E. Orms

    Mr. Orms, 56, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Orms understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Orms meets the requirements of the
vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him
in 2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds a Class B CDL from Alabama.

Michael D. Pederson

    Mr. Pederson, 38, has had ITDM since 1991. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Pederson understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Pederson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Minnesota.

William J. Rodgers

    Mr. Rodgers, 51, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Rodgers understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Rodgers meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Mark A. Rosenau

    Mr. Rosenau, 46 has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Rosenau understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Rosenau meets the
vision requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined
him in 2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.

George M. Sapirstein

    Mr. Sapirstein, 59, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Sapirstein understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sapirstein meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from New
Jersey.

Daniel B. Shaw

    Mr. Shaw, 48 has had ITDM since 1990. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Shaw understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Shaw meets the vision requirements
of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2013 and
certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class
E operator's license from Florida.

Christopher A. Sosa

    Mr. Sosa, 43, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Sosa understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sosa meets the vision requirements
of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2013 and
certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class
A CDL from Maryland.

John C. Thomas

    Mr. Thomas, 63, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Thomas understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Thomas meets the vision

requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in
2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds
a Class B CDL from Indiana.

Richard Wasko

    Mr. Wasko, 55, has had ITDM since 1993. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Wasko understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wasko meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in
2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds
a Class E operator's license from Florida.

Douglas E. Wilhoit

    Mr. Wilhoit, 49, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Wilhoit understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wilhoit meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2013 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Richard A. Wilk

    Mr. Wilk, 54, has had ITDM since 2011. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Wilk understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wilk meets the requirements of the
vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him
in 2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds a Class C CDL from Ohio.

Thomas A. Young

    Mr. Young, 58, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2013 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Young understands diabetes
management and monitoring, as stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Young meets the vision
requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him
in 2013 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds a Class B CDL from Texas.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. We will consider all comments received before
the close of business on the closing date indicated in the date section
of the notice.
    FMCSA notes that section 4129 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible
and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users requires
the Secretary to revise its diabetes exemption program established on
September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441) \1\. The revision must provide for
individual assessment of drivers with diabetes mellitus, and be
consistent with the criteria described in section 4018 of the
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 31305).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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-2013-0190 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-2013-0190 and click
``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket Folder'' and you will find all
documents and comments related to the proposed rulemaking.

    Issued on: October 24, 2013.
Larry W. Minor,
 Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-25798 Filed 10-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 103 (Thursday, May 29, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30735-30737]
[FR Doc No: 2014-12338]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2013-0509; A-1-FRL-9909-99-Region 1]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
New Hampshire; Decommissioning of Stage II Vapor Recovery Systems

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of New
Hampshire Department of Environmental Services. This revision includes
regulatory amendments that require the decommissioning of Stage II
vapor recovery systems at gasoline dispensing facilities by December
22, 2015, and a demonstration that such removal is consistent with the
Clean Air Act and EPA guidance. The intended effect of this action is
to approve New Hampshire's revised vapor recovery regulation. This
action is being taken in accordance with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This rule is effective on June 30, 2014.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2013-0509. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Office of Ecosystem
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning
Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if
at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.
    Copies of the documents relevant to this action are also available
for public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at
State Air Agency, Department of Environmental Services, 6 Hazen Drive,
P.O. Box 95, Concord, NH 03302-0095.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ariel Garcia, Air Quality Planning
Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional
Office, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (mail code: OEP05-2), Boston,
MA 02109-3912, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number (617) 918-
0660, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is
used, we mean EPA.
    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. Background and Purpose
II. Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

    On March 10, 2014 (79 FR 13268), EPA published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) for the State of New Hampshire. The NPRM proposed
approval of New Hampshire's revised vapor recovery regulation. The
formal SIP revision was submitted by New Hampshire on June 18, 2013 and
included a demonstration that the decommissioning of Stage II vapor
recovery systems at gasoline dispensing facilities is consistent with
the Clean Air Act and EPA guidance. A detailed discussion of New
Hampshire's June 18, 2013 SIP revision and EPA's rationale for
proposing approval of the SIP revision were provided in the NPRM and
will not be restated here. No public comments were received on the
NPRM.

II. Final Action

    EPA is approving New Hampshire's June 18, 2013 SIP revision.
Specifically, EPA is approving the amended New Hampshire rule Env-Or
500, Recovery of Gasoline Vapors, and incorporating it into the New
Hampshire SIP. EPA is approving this SIP revision because it meets all
applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA guidance, and it
will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 28, 2014. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: May 22, 2014.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart EE--New Hampshire

0
2. Section 52.1520 is amended by adding ``Env-Or 500'' in table (c)
after ``Env-A 3600'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1520  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                     EPA-Approved New Hampshire Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State       EPA approval date
          State citation              Title/subject     effective date          \1\              Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Env-Or 500.......................  Recovery of              11/17/2012  5/29/2014..........  Includes
                                    Gasoline Vapors.                    [Insert Federal       decommissioning of
                                                                         Register page        Stage II vapor
                                                                         number where the     recovery systems.
                                                                         document begins].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the
  Federal Register notice cited in this column for the particular provision.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-12338 Filed 5-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on February 17, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 2004-17115

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

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

Applicant:  VOLGA-DNEPR J.S. CARGO AIRLINE
        Date Filed:  February 12, 2004

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g) to permit
the applicant to operate, on behalf of Lockheed Martin, one, one-way
cargo charter flight from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to Moffet Field,
Sunnyvale, California, on or about February 18-22, 2004, using its
AN-124-100 aircraft.  Volga-Dnepr plans to carry on this flight one
Lockheed Martin Space Systems communication satellite deck antenna.  The
applicant stated that Lockheed Martin urgently needs lift to meet tight
development and launch schedules, that the cargo is too large for
transportation on U.S.-carrier aircraft; and that surface transportation
is not feasible because of the delicate nature and high value of the
cargo, and conditions unsuitable to maintaining system integrity
compliance.

Applicant representative:  Glenn P. Wicks,<PHONE_NUMBER>         DOT
analyst:  Allen F. Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  Volga-Dnepr served its application on those U.S.
carriers operating large all-cargo aircraft.  Each carrier indicated
that it did not have aircraft available to conduct the proposed
operation and that it had no comment or did not oppose grant of the
requested authority.

Statutory Standards:  Under 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g), we may authorize
a foreign air carrier to carry commercial traffic between U.S. points
(i.e., cabotage traffic) under limited circumstances.  Specifically, we
must find that the authority is required in the public interest; that
because of an emergency created by unusual circumstances not arising in
the normal course of business the traffic cannot be accommodated by U.S.
carriers holding certificates under 49 U.S.C. section 41102; that all
possible efforts have been made to place the traffic on U.S. carriers;
and that the transportation is necessary to avoid unreasonable hardship
to the traffic involved (an additional required finding, concerning
emergency transportation during labor disputes, was not relevant here).

        DISPOSITION

Action: Approved
                                             Action date:  February 17,
2004

Effective dates of authority granted:  February 17, 2004, through
February 22, 2004

Basis for approval:  We are granting Volga-Dnepr’s request to operate
its proposed one-way flight from Philadelphia to Moffet Field, through
February 22, 2004.  We found that its request met all the relevant
criteria of 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g) for the grant of an exemption of
this type and that the grant was required in the public interest.
Specifically, we were persuaded that the need to move the cargo promptly
in order to meet the tight development and launch schedules, the fact
that the cargo could not be transported by surface transportation
because of its delicate nature and high value, the potential negative
impact of delivery delay, and the unique, outsized nature of the cargo,
constituted an emergency not arising in the normal course of business.
Moreover, based on the representations of the U.S. carriers, we
concluded that no U.S. carrier had aircraft available that could be used
to conduct the operations at issue here.  We also found that grant of
this authority would prevent unreasonable hardship to Lockheed Martin.
Finally, we found that the applicant was qualified to perform its
proposed operation.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to our
standard exemption conditions and to the condition that the applicant
must comply with an FAA-approved flight routing for the authorized
operation.

Action taken by:        Karan K. Bhatia

                                  Assistant Secretary

                     for Aviation and International Affairs

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

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