[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 78 (Thursday, April 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22773-22777]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09460]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0305]

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

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 26, 2015. All
comments will be investigated by FMCSA. The exemptions will be issued
the day after the comment period closes.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0305 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: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles A. Horan, III, Director,
Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards,<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. If you have questions regarding viewing or submitting
material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone (202) 366-
9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. 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 35 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.

II. Qualifications of Applicants

Donald A. Becker, Jr.

    Mr. Becker, 39, has had amblyopia in his right eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is counting fingers, and in his left
eye, 20/15. Following an examination in 2014, his ophthalmologist
stated, ``In your medical opinion, Patient has sufficient vision to
perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle, Yes
[sic].'' Mr. Becker reported that he has driven straight trucks for 13
years, accumulating 195,000 miles. He holds a chauffer's license from
Michigan. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Ronald G. Bradley

    Mr. Bradley, 50, has had a macular scar in his left eye since 2005.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/
90. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``I have
been asked to submit a signed statement certifying that Mr. Bradley has
sufficient vision to drive a commercial vehicle . . . While his visual
condition could change, my professional opinion is that since this
condition has been stable for nearly ten years, I would expect it to
continue to remain the same.'' Mr. Bradley reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 32 years, accumulating 73,600 miles, and tractor-
trailer combinations for 32 years, accumulating 320,000 miles. He holds
a Class A CDL from Indiana. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Rober J. Bruce

    Mr. Bruce, 63, has had optic atrophy in his left eye since 2011.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/25, and in his left eye, 20/
70. Following an examination in 2014, his neurologist stated, ``In my
opinion, based on these evaluations, Mr. Bruce has sufficient vision to
perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.''
Mr. Bruce reported that he has driven straight trucks for 12 years,
accumulating 120,000 miles. He holds an operator's license from
Arizona. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Mark A. Carter

    Mr. Carter, 63, has had enucleation in his right eye due to a
traumatic incident in 1977. The visual acuity in his right eye is no
light perception, and in his left eye, 20/15. Following an examination
in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``In my medical opinion I feel mark
has sufficient vision to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Carter
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 40 years, accumulating
20,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 43 years,
accumulating 3.44 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Oklahoma.
His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

William T. Costie

    Mr. Costie, 51, has had optic nerve hypoplasia in his left eye
since birth. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his
left eye, 20/80. Following an examination in 2014, his ophthalmologist
stated, ``Mr. Costie is a 51 year old gentleman who has congenital
optic nerve hypoplasia in the left eye . . . It is my opinion that this
gentleman has not had, nor should have in the future, any problem
driving a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Costie reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 10 years, accumulating 36,000 miles, and tractor-
trailer combinations for 5 years, accumulating 500,000 miles. He holds
a Class A CDL from New York. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows one crash, to which he did contribute but was not cited, and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Donald W. Donaldson

    Mr. Donaldson, 55, has a corneal scar in his right eye due to a
traumatic incident in 1995. The visual acuity in his right eye is no
light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination
in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``Visual field is adequate to operate
a commercial vehicle and condition has been stable to for years without
adverse effect on driving ability. Mr. Donaldson has adequate acuity
and color perception to continue operating a commercial vehicle
safely.'' Mr. Donaldson reported that he has driven tractor-trailer
combinations for 30 years, accumulating 2.25 million miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from Georgia. His driving record for the last 3 years shows
no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Glenn E. Dowell

    Mr. Dowell, 58, has aphakia in his left eye due to a traumatic
incident in 1990. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in
his left eye, 20/100. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist
stated, ``I feel he has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Dowell reported that he
has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 40 years, accumulating two
million miles. He holds an operator's license from Indiana. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and one conviction for a
moving violation in a CMV; he exceeded the speed limit by 10 mph.

James L. Duck

    Mr. Duck, 70, has had amblyopia in his right eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in his left eye, 20/
25. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``Mr.
Duck has had poor vison in his right eye since he was a child. This
condition is stable, and he has compensated and adapted to this
condition his entire adult life. As such, he still has sufficient
visual acuity to perform the driving tasks required to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Duck reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 50 years, accumulating 875,000 miles, tractor-trailer
combinations for 50 years, accumulating 875,000 miles. He holds an
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.

Terrence R. Ervin

    Mr. Ervin, 59, has complete loss of vision in his left eye due to a
traumatic incident in 1992. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/
20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following an examination
in 2014, his ophthalmologist stated, ``He knows and understands the
precautions that are necessary for driving; therefore, his vision is
sufficient to perform the driving tasks required to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Ervin reported that he has driven tractor-
trailer combinations for 13 years, accumulating 2.6 million miles. He
holds a Class A CDL from California. His driving record

for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Douglas E. Hetrick

    Mr. Hetrick, 57, has had amblyopia in his left eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/
60. Following an examination in 2014, his ophthalmologist stated, ``Mr.
Hetrick has a history of amblyopia in his left eye since childhood that
is stable. . .With the following testing noted above, I believe that
Mr. Hetrick is able to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Hetrick
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 40 years, accumulating
50,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Colorado. His driving record
for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Arthur R. Hughson

    Mr. Hughson, 50, has had a deformed retina in his left eye since
birth. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left
eye, 20/400. Following an examination in 2015, his optometrist stated,
``His excellent driving record and adaptation to his visual status
makes him a safe driver for a CDL.'' Mr. Hughson reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 5 years, accumulating 500,000 miles, and
tractor-trailer combinations for 3 years, accumulating 180,000 miles.
He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania. His driving record for the
last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations
in a CMV.

Marc R. Johnston

    Mr. Johnston, 54, has complete loss of vision in his left eye due
to a traumatic incident in 1999. The visual acuity in his right eye is
20/20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following an
examination in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``Mr. Johnston's right eye
is very healthy. . .He is still able to drive a commercial vehicle.''
Mr. Johnston reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations
for 31 years, accumulating 525,512 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from
Oregon. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Joseph M. Jones

    Mr. Jones, 70, has a retinal scar in his right eye due to a
traumatic incident during childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye
is counting fingers, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an
examination in 2014, his ophthalmologist stated, ``Mr. Jones has visual
acuity of count fingers only in the right eye. . .I feel that the
patient is qualified to obtain a commercial driver's license.'' Mr.
Jones reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 20
years, accumulating 740,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Idaho.
His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Larry C. Kautz

    Mr. Kautz, 49, has had amblyopia in his right eye since birth. The
visual acuity in his right eye is 20/70, and in his left eye, 20/25.
Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``In my
opinion, Larry Kautz has sufficient vision to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Kautz reported that he has driven straight trucks for 12
years, accumulating 10,800 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from
Pennsylvania. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Theodore J. Kenyon

    Mr. Kenyon, 73, has had refractive amblyopia in his right eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/40, and in his left
eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2015, his optometrist stated,
``He has a history of refractive amblyopia (lazy eye) in his RE since
childhood. . . In my medical opinion Mr. Theodore Kenyon is qualified
to drive a commercial vehicle on public roadways.'' Mr. Kenyon reported
that he has driven straight trucks for 55 years, accumulating 825,000
miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 30 years, accumulating
300,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Vermont. His driving record
for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

Howard H. Key, Jr.

    Mr. Key, 54, has had a central macula scar in his right eye since
1989. The visual acuity in his right eye is counting fingers, and in
his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist
stated, ``In my opinion Mr. Key has sufficient vision to perform the
driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Key
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 22 years, accumulating
440,000 miles. He holds an operator's license from Arkansas. His
driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions
for moving violations in a CMV.

Bernard Khraich

    Mr. Khraich, 38, has light perception in his right eye due to a
traumatic incident during childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye
is light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an
examination in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``Capable of driving a
commercial vehicle, has sufficient vision.'' Mr. Khraich reported that
he has driven straight trucks for 10 years, accumulating 50,000 miles,
tractor-trailer combinations for six years, accumulating 1,200 miles,
and buses for five years, accumulating 500 miles. He holds an
operator's license from California. His driving record for the last 3
years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Bradley R. King

    Mr. King, 58, has complete loss of vision in his right eye due to a
traumatic incident in 1979. The visual acuity in his right eye is no
light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination
in 2014, his ophthalmologist stated, ``Brad has sufficient vision to
perform the driving tasks that are required to continue to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. King reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 42 years, accumulating 42,000 miles, and tractor-trailer
combinations for 4 years, accumulating 28,000 miles. He holds a Class A
CDL from Iowa. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

David C. Leoffler

    Mr. Leoffler, 51, has had amblyopia in his left eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left
eye, 20/200. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist stated,
``His Amblyopia was not successfully treated in early childhood,
resulting in permanent monocular vision impairment. It is my
professional judgment that Mr. Leoffler can safely and proficiently
operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Leoffler reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 20 years, accumulating 600,000 miles, and
tractor-trailer combinations for 20 years, accumulating 1.8 million
miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Colorado. His driving record for the
last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations
in a CMV.

Melvin D. Moffett

    Mr. Moffett, 70, has had a retinal detachment in his left eye since
1999. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/40, and in his left eye,
20/100. Following an examination in 2015, his

ophthalmologist stated, ``Posterior segment examination performed
previously revealed evidence of an old, treated retinal detachment
present in the patient's left eye . . . It appears at this time that
Mr. Moffett should be able to operate a commercial vehicle
appropriately.'' Mr. Moffett reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 40 years, accumulating 80,000 miles. He holds an operator's
license from Kentucky. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no
crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Armando F. Pedroso

    Mr. Pedroso, 34, has corneal scarring in his right eye due to a
traumatic incident during childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye
is 20/200, and in his left eye, 20/15. Following an examination in
2014, his optometrist stated, ``It is my opinion that Mr. Armando
Pedroso has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to
operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Pedroso reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 8.5 years, accumulating 340,000 miles. He holds a
Class B CDL from Minnesota. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Quang M. Pham

    Mr. Pham, 29, has had a large choroidal scar over macula in his
left eye since birth. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and
in his left eye, 20/400. Following an examination in 2014, his
optometrist stated, ``With both eyes open patient has sufficient vision
to perform driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.''
Mr. Pham reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 2
years, accumulating 52,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Texas.
His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no
convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

William A. Ramirez Vazquez

    Mr. Ramirez Vazquez, 37, has had chorioretinal scar in his left eye
since 2001. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his
left eye, 20/400. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist
stated, ``In my medical opinion, William has sufficient vision to
perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.''
Mr. Ramirez Vazquez reported that he has driven straight trucks for 15
years, accumulating 150,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for
4 years, accumulating 400,000 miles. He holds an operator's license
from California. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no
crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Donald W. Randall

    Mr. Randall, 55, has complete loss of vision in his left eye due to
a traumatic incident during childhood. The visual acuity in his right
eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following an
examination in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``He presented with a
desire to get a CDL. There is no visual hindrance in the right eye that
would inhibit his driving.'' Mr. Randall reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 20 years, accumulating 20,000 miles, and tractor-
trailer combinations for 20 years, accumulating 20,000 miles. He holds
a Class A CDL from Utah. His driving record for the last 3 years shows
no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Glen E. Robbins

    Mr. Robbins, 71, has had a central macular scar in his right eye
since 1963. The visual acuity in his right eye is no light perception,
and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2014, his
ophthalmologist stated, ``Based on the visual field extent demonstrated
on the formal visual field, I feel he has sufficient vision to perform
driving tasks in regards to operating a commercial vehicle.'' Mr.
Robbins reported that he has driven straight trucks for 3.5 years,
accumulating 223,562 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 48
years, accumulating 4.8 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from
Wyoming. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Enrique F. Rodriguez Gonzalez

    Mr. Rodriguez Gonzalez, 45, has had glaucoma in his left eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left
eye, 20/50. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist stated,
``This patient has sufficient clarity and visual field to operate a
commercial motor vehicle safely.'' Mr. Rodriguez Gonzalez reported that
he has driven straight trucks for 10.5 years, accumulating 273,000
miles. He holds an operator's license from North Carolina. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

Ronald P. Schoborg

    Mr. Schoborg, 76, has had amblyopia in his right eye since
childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/60, and in his left
eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2015, his ophthalmologist
stated, ``I believe Mr. Schoborg has sufficient vision to perform the
tasks necessary to drive a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Schoborg reported
that he has driven buses for 12 years, accumulating 396,000 miles. He
holds a Class A CDL from Arkansas. His driving record for the last 3
years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Raymond Sherrill

    Mr. Sherrill, 40, has complete loss of vision in his left eye due
to a traumatic incident in 2013. The visual acuity in his right eye is
20/20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following an
examination in 2015, his optometrist stated, ``My opinion no visual
problems to prohibit from commercial vehicle operation.'' Mr. Sherrill
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 21 years, accumulating
63,000 miles. He holds a Class BM CDL from Pennsylvania. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

Roger D. Simpson

    Mr. Simpson, 68, has had ischemic optic neuropathy in his right eye
since 2009. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in his
left eye, 20/25. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist
stated, ``I explained to Mr. Simpson that his visual function appears
stable and it is my medical opinion that he is able to continue to have
sufficient vision to drive as a commercial driver adequately.'' Mr.
Simpson reported that he has driven straight trucks for six months,
accumulating 500 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 20 years,
accumulating three million miles. He holds an operator's license from
Arkansas. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and
no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Mehrzad Tavanaie

    Mr. Tavanaie, 49, has had amblyopia in his left eye since birth.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/
100. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist stated,
``Amblyopic left eye has existed since birth. Patient is competent &
comfortable in driving professionally for many year. Patient has been
driving commercially [sic] for 19 yrs [sic] without incident.'' Mr.
Tavanaie reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for
19 years, accumulating 100,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from
California. His driving record for the last 3 years shows

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

Steven M. Tewhill

    Mr. Tewhill, 49, has had ocular histoplasmosis in his left eye
since 2007. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his
left eye, 20/150. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist
stated, ``After thorough examination, it is my professional opinion
that Mr. Tewhill has sufficient vision to perform his driving tasks to
operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Tewhill reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 32 years, accumulating 16,000 miles, and tractor-
trailer combinations for 10 years, accumulating 10,200 miles. He holds
a Class A CDL from Arkansas. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Brett E. Thomas

    Mr. Thomas, 46, has had amblyopia in his left eye since birth. The
visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/50.
Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``His vision
is great, and he is able to sufficiently able to operate a commercial
vehicle safely!'' Mr. Thomas reported that he has driven straight
trucks for 8.5 years, accumulating 85,000 miles, and tractor-trailer
combinations for 8.5 years, accumulating 170,000 miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from Texas. His driving record for the last 3 years shows
no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Keith E. Thompson

    Mr. Thompson, 40, has a severed optic nerve in his left eye due to
a traumatic incident in 1994. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/
20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following an examination
in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``Mr. Thompson has fully adapted to
his monocular condition using visual cues to fill in for binocular
situations (i.e. size, occlusion etc.). In my professional opinion, he
is capable in handling any commercial truck while driving.'' Mr.
Thompson reported that he has driven straight trucks for 21 years,
accumulating 630,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Missouri. His
driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions
for moving violations in a CMV.

Jeffrey W. Tucker

    Mr. Tucker, 47, has had amblyopia in his left eye since childhood.
The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/
100. Following an examination in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``In my
opinion, Mr. Tucker has sufficient vision to perform all driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Tucker reported that he
has driven straight trucks for 5 years, accumulating 130,000 miles. He
holds a chauffeur's license from Indiana. His driving record for the
last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations
in a CMV.

Thomas W. Workman

    Mr. Workman, 63, has complete loss of vision in his left eye due to
a traumatic incident in childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye
is 20/20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following an
examination in 2014, his optometrist stated, ``In my medical opinion,
Thomas has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to
operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Workman reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 45 years, accumulating 1.8 million miles. He holds
a Class B CDL from Illinois. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

III. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice, indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. 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 the
Agency can contact you if it has questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
put the docket number FMCSA-2014-0304 in the ``Keyword'' box, and click
``Search. When the new screen appears, click on ``Comment Now!'' button
and type your comment into the text box in the following screen. Choose
whether you are submitting your comment as an individual or on behalf
of a third party and then submit. 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.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this notice based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
insert the docket number FMCSA-2014-0304 in the ``Keyword'' box and
click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket Folder'' button and choose
the document listed to review. If you do not have access to the
Internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Issued On: April 17, 2015.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-09460 Filed 4-22-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 235 (Friday, December 8, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 85632-85633]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26988]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2022-E-2185]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; Nextstellis

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) has
determined the regulatory review period for Nextstellis and is
publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA
has made the determination because of the submission of an application
to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO),
Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that
human drug product.

DATES: Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) are incorrect must submit either electronic
or written comments and ask for a redetermination by February 6, 2024.
Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination
regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence
during the regulatory review period by June 5, 2024. See ``Petitions''
in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of February 6, 2024. Comments
received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions)
will be considered timely if they are received on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2022-E-2185 for ``Determination of Regulatory Review Period for
Purposes of Patent Extension; NEXTSTELLIS.'' Received comments, those
filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket
and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets
Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 240-
402-7500.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with Sec.  10.20 (21 CFR 10.20) and
other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's
posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18,
2015, or access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts

and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984
(Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term
Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may
be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item
(human drug or biological product, animal drug product, medical device,
food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by
FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's
regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of
extension an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: a
testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the
testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical
investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the
approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial
submission of an application to market the human drug product and
continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product.
Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward
the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award
(for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any
time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's
determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human
drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase
as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
    FDA has approved for marketing the human drug product, Nextstellis
(drospirenone and estetrol) indicated for use by females of
reproductive potential to prevent pregnancy. Subsequent to this
approval, the USPTO received a patent term restoration application for
Nextstellis (U.S. Patent No. 7,732,430) from Mayne Pharma LLC and the
USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining the patent's
eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated September
21, 2022, FDA advised the USPTO that this human drug product had
undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of
Nextstellis represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use
of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that FDA determine the
product's regulatory review period.

II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
Nextstellis is 1,732 days. Of this time, 1,366 days occurred during the
testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 366 days occurred
during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the
following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became effective:
July 20, 2016. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the date the
investigational new drug application became effective was on July 20,
2016.
    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to
the human drug product under section 505 of the FD&C Act: April 15,
2020. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the new drug
application (NDA) for Nextstellis (NDA 214154) was initially submitted
on April 15, 2020.
    3. The date the application was approved: April 15, 2021. FDA has
verified the applicant's claim that NDA 214154 was approved on April
15, 2021.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO
applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual
period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension,
this applicant seeks 1,048 days of patent term extension.

III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and, under
21 CFR 60.24, ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, as
specified in Sec.  60.30 (21 CFR 60.30), any interested person may
petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for
extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period.
To meet its burden, the petition must comply with all the requirements
of Sec.  60.30, including but not limited to: must be timely (see
DATES), must be filed in accordance with Sec.  10.20, must contain
sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation, and must certify that a
true and complete copy of the petition has been served upon the patent
applicant. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42,
1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
    Submit petitions electronically to https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are
required) to the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: December 5, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-26988 Filed 12-7-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14784-14785]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6028]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9646-7]

Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed consent decree; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or the ``Act''), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is hereby
given of a proposed consent decree to address a lawsuit filed by
Kentucky Environmental Foundation in the United States District Court
for the District of Columbia: Kentucky Environmental Foundation v.
Jackson, No. 11-1253 (D.D.C.). Plaintiff filed a complaint and a first
amended complaint alleging that EPA failed to take timely action to
approve, disapprove, or approve in part and disapprove in part the
State of Kentucky's State Implementation Plan submittals or potions of
submittals for: (1) The Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area, submitted to EPA on or about December 3, 2008, with regard to the
1997 annual fine particular matter (PM2.5) National Ambient
Air Quality Standard ( NAAQS); and (2) the Kentucky portion of the
Louisville area, submitted to EPA on or about December 3, 2008, with
regard to the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The proposed consent
decree establishes a deadline of October 1, 2012, for EPA to take
action on the Louisville submittal.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received
by April 12, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2012-0190, online at www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred method);
by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by mail to EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be
formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie L. Hogan, Air and Radiation
Law Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree

    The proposed consent decree would resolve a lawsuit filed by
Kentucky Environmental Foundation seeking to compel the Agency to take
final action under sections 110(k)(2) and (3) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C.
7410(k)(2) and (3), on the State of Kentucky's State Implementation
Plan (SIP) submittals dated December 3, 2008. Specifically, the lawsuit
seeks to compel the Agency to take final action, pursuant to section
110(k) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7410(k), on the 1997 P.M.2.5
nonattainment area requirements, including the attainment
demonstrations, contingency measures, emissions inventories, and
reasonably

available control measures/reasonably available control technology
requirements in the Cincinnati-Hamilton SIP and the Louisville SIP.
    On March 9, 2011, and September 29, 2011, respectively, EPA
determined that the Cincinnati-Hamilton and the Louisville areas had
attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. See 76 FR 12860; 76 FR
60373. On September 30, 2011, the State of Kentucky withdrew its
previously submitted attainment demonstrations, contingency measures,
and reasonably available control measures for the Cincinnati-Hamilton
SIP and the Louisville SIP but did not withdraw any portions of its
submittals for the Cincinnati-Hamilton SIP and the Louisville SIP that
pertain to emissions inventories. On December 15, 2011, EPA approved
the emissions inventory in the Cincinnati-Hamilton SIP. See 76 FR
77903.
    The proposed consent decree requires that, no later than October 1,
2012, the appropriate EPA official shall sign a notice of final
rulemaking approving, disapproving, or approving in part and
disapproving in part the emissions inventory in the Louisville SIP. In
addition, the proposed consent decree requires that, following
signature, EPA shall expeditiously deliver the notice to the Office of
the Federal Register for publication in the Federal Register and shall
thereafter provide a copy of the notice to Plaintiff within ten (10)
days. After EPA fulfills its obligations under the proposed consent
decree, the consent decree may be terminated.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the
proposed consent decree from persons who were not named as parties or
intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of
Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree
if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that
such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent
with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of
Justice determines that consent to this consent decree should be
withdrawn, the terms of the proposed consent decree will be affirmed.

II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent
Decree

A. How can I get a copy of the consent decree?

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2012-0190) contains a copy of the proposed consent
decree. The official public docket is available for public viewing at
the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
www.regulations.gov. You may use www.regulations.gov to submit or view
public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the
official public docket, and to access those documents in the public
docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in
the appropriate docket identification number then select ``search''.
    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless
the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI
and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not
included in the official public docket or in the electronic public
docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including
copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed
in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access
any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket
Center.

B. How and to whom do I submit comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot
read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you
for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    Use of the www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA
electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The
electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail
(email) system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an
email comment directly to the Docket without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address is automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

    Dated: March 6, 2012.
Patricia Embrey,
Acting Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2012-6028 Filed 3-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 200 (Tuesday, October 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63406-63409]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25322]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68021; File No. SR-NYSE-2012-50]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Implementing Changes to Certain Fees and Credits Within the New York
Stock Exchange LLC Price List

October 9, 2012.
    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 September 26, 2012, New York Stock Exchange LLC (the
``Exchange'' or ``NYSE'') 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 prepared by the
Exchange. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to make changes to certain fees and credits
within its Price List, which the Exchange proposes to become operative
on October 1, 2012. The text of the proposed rule change is available
on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, 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, the self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to make changes to certain fees and credits
within its Price List, which the Exchange proposes to become operative
on October 1, 2012.
Transaction Fees
    The Exchange currently provides a per share credit per transaction
when adding liquidity to the Exchange in a security with a per share
price of $1.00 or more (displayed and non-displayed orders) of $0.0015,
or $0.0010 if it is a non-displayed reserve order. The Exchange
proposes to add two additional per share credits that would apply in
lieu of the current adding liquidity credit, if certain thresholds are
met:
     First, the Exchange proposes to provide a $0.0018 per
share credit per transaction when adding displayed liquidity to the
Exchange if either (i) the

member organization has average daily volume (``ADV'') that adds
liquidity to the Exchange during the billing month (``Adding ADV,''
which shall exclude any liquidity added by a Designated Market Maker
(``DMM'')) that is at least 1.5% of consolidated average daily volume
in NYSE-listed securities during the billing month (``NYSE CADV''), and
executes market at-the-close (``MOC'') and limit at-the-close (``LOC'')
orders of at least 0.375% of NYSE CADV, or (ii) the member organization
has Adding ADV that is at least 0.8% of NYSE CADV, executes MOC and LOC
orders of at least 0.12% of NYSE CADV, and adds liquidity to the
Exchange as a Supplemental Liquidity Provider (``SLP'') for all
assigned SLP securities in the aggregate (including shares of both a
SLP proprietary trading unit (``SLP-Prop'') and a SLP market maker
(``SLMM'') of the same member organization) of more than 0.25% of NYSE
CADV.
     Second, the Exchange proposes to provide a $0.0017 per
share credit per transaction when adding displayed liquidity to the
Exchange if the member organization has Adding ADV that is at least
0.20% of NYSE CADV and executes MOC and LOC orders of at least 0.10% of
NYSE CADV.
    Currently, the transaction fee for certain transactions in stocks
with a per share price of $1.00 or more depends on the characteristics
of the transaction, including order type.\3\ Those transactions that do
not have a specified per share charge based on their characteristics
(``all other'' transactions) are currently subject to an equity per
share charge of $0.0023 per transaction for non-floor broker
transactions or $0.0022 per transaction for Floor broker transactions.
The Exchange proposes to increase this charge, such that for all other
non-floor broker transactions (i.e., when taking liquidity from the
Exchange), the Exchange proposes to increase the per share charge from
$0.0023 to $0.0025 per transaction. The Exchange proposes to raise the
per share charge for all other floor broker transactions from $0.0022
to $0.0024 per transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For example, the Exchange charges $0.0005 per share (subject
to a monthly cap) for at the opening or at the opening only orders,
$0.0055 per share per transaction for all MOC and LOC orders from
any member organization executing an ADV of MOC/LOC activity on the
Exchange in that month of at least 14 million shares, and $0.0095
per share per transaction for all other MOC and LOC orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to raise the credit per share
for executions of orders sent to a floor broker for representation on
the Exchange when adding liquidity to the NYSE Display Book system from
$0.0017 to $0.0019 per transaction.
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to include an additional credit per
share of $0.0002 for member organizations and floor brokers that
provide displayed liquidity to the Exchange in the following ten active
securities (``Active Securities''), which were selected based on year-
to-date CADV:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Company name                            Symbol
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bank of America Corp.......................  BAC.
Citigroup Inc..............................  C.
Ford Motor Company.........................  F.
General Electric...........................  GE.
JPMorgan Chase & Co........................  JPM.
Nokia Corporation..........................  NOK.
PFIZER Inc.................................  PFE.
Sprint Nextel Corporation..................  S.
AT&T Inc...................................  T.
Wells Fargo & Co...........................  WFC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The credit will apply to transactions in the Active Securities and
is in addition to any other credit for floor and non-floor
transactions.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The credit will not apply to transactions in the Active
Securities in the Retail Liquidity Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DMMs
    The Exchange proposes to increase the per share charge for DMMs
that take liquidity from the Exchange from $0.0023 to $0.0025.
    DMMs are currently eligible for a per share credit when adding
liquidity in More Active Securities \5\ if the More Active Security has
a stock price of $1.00 or more, the DMM meets both the More Active
Securities Quoting Requirement \6\ and the More Active Securities
Quoted Size Ratio Requirement,\7\ and the DMM's providing liquidity
meets certain thresholds, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``More Active Securities'' are those with an ADV in the
previous month equal to or greater than one million shares.
    \6\ A DMM meets the ``More Active Securities Quoting
Requirement'' when a More Active Security has a stock price of $1.00
or more and the DMM quotes at the National Best Bid or Offer
(``NBBO'') in the applicable security at least 10% of the time in
the applicable month.
    \7\ A DMM meets the ``More Active Securities Quoted Size Ratio
Requirement'' when the DMM Quoted Size for an applicable month is at
least 15% of the NYSE Quoted Size. The ``NYSE Quoted Size'' is
calculated by multiplying the average number of shares quoted on the
NYSE at the NBBO by the percentage of time the NYSE had a quote
posted at the NBBO. The ``DMM Quoted Size'' is calculated by
multiplying the average number of shares of the applicable security
quoted at the NBBO by the DMM by the percentage of time during which
the DMM quoted at the NBBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     $0.0026 per share if the DMM's providing liquidity is 10%
or less of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity in each such
security for that month; \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The NYSE total intraday adding liquidity is totaled monthly
and includes all NYSE adding liquidity, excluding NYSE open and NYSE
close volume, by all NYSE participants, including SLPs, customers,
Floor brokers and DMMs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     $0.0030 per share if the DMM's providing liquidity is more
than 10% but less than or equal to 20% of the NYSE's total intraday
adding liquidity in each such security for that month; and
     $0.0029 per share if the DMM's providing liquidity is more
than 20% of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity in each such
security for that month.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange notes that the $0.0029 per-share credit is
applicable to all of the member organization's adding liquidity in
each such security for that month, not just the incremental
liquidity that is more than 30% of the NYSE's total intraday adding
liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to change the level of providing liquidity
for DMMs to be eligible for the credits. Specifically, DMMs would be
eligible for a per share credit when adding liquidity in More Active
Securities if the More Active Security has a stock price of $1.00 or
more, the DMM meets both the More Active Securities Quoting Requirement
and the More Active Securities Quoted Size Ratio Requirement, and the
DMM's providing liquidity meets certain thresholds, as follows:
     $0.0026 per share if the DMM's providing liquidity is 15%
or less of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity in each such
security for that month;
     $0.0030 per share if the DMM's providing liquidity is more
than 15% but less than or equal to 30% of the NYSE's total intraday
adding liquidity in each such security for that month; and
     $0.0029 per share if the DMM's providing liquidity is more
than 30% of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity in each such
security for that month.
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to include an additional credit per
share of $0.0002 for DMMs that provide displayed liquidity to the
Exchange in the Active Securities. The credit will apply to
transactions in the Active Securities and is in addition to any other
credit for DMMs.
SLPs
    The Exchange proposes to increase the credit per share for SLPs
that add liquidity to the Exchange in securities with a per share price
of $1.00 or more, if the SLP (i) meets the 10% average or more quoting
requirement in an assigned security pursuant to Rule 107B (quotes of an
SLP-Prop and an SLMM of the same member organization shall not be
aggregated) and (ii) adds liquidity for all assigned SLP securities in
the

aggregate (including shares of both an SLP-Prop and an SLMM of the same
member organization) of an ADV of more than 0.22% of NYSE CADV from
$0.0021 to $0.0023 per transaction, and from $0.0016 to $0.0018 per
transaction for non-displayed reserve orders.
    The Exchange proposes to include an additional credit per share of
$0.0025 per transaction for SLPs that add liquidity to the Exchange in
securities with a per share price of $1.00 or more, if the SLP (i)
meets the 10% average or more quoting requirement in an assigned
security pursuant to Rule 107B (quotes of an SLP-Prop and an SLMM of
the same member organization shall not be aggregated), (ii) adds
liquidity for all assigned SLP securities in the aggregate (including
shares of both an SLP-Prop and an SLMM of the same member organization)
of an ADV of more than 0.22% of NYSE CADV, (iii) adds liquidity for all
assigned SLP securities in the aggregate (including shares of both an
SLP-Prop and an SLMM of the same member organization) of an ADV during
the billing month that is at least a 0.18% increase over the SLP's
September 2012 Adding ADV (``SLP Baseline ADV''), and (iv) has a
minimum provide ADV for all assigned SLP securities of 12 million
shares.
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to include an additional credit per
share of $0.0002 for SLPs that provide displayed liquidity to the
Exchange in the Active Securities. The credit will apply to
transactions in the Active Securities and is in addition to any other
credit for SLPs.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\10\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\11\ in particular, because it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities and does
not unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the two new transaction fee credits and the
increased credit for executions of orders in securities with a per
share price of $1.00 or more sent to the floor broker for
representation on the Exchange when adding liquidity to the NYSE
Display Book system are reasonable because they encourage additional
displayed liquidity on the Exchange. The Exchange believes the new
credits are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they are
open to all member organizations on an equal basis, provide discounts
that are reasonably related to the value to the Exchange's market
quality associated with higher volumes, and, in the case of the $0.0018
per share credit, the Exchange has provided alternative methods for
achieving the credit.
    The Exchange believes that increasing the per share charge for
floor broker and non-floor broker transactions in securities with a per
share price of $1.00 or more is reasonable in light of the increased
credits the Exchange is proposing in order to increase liquidity on the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that the additional credit for
transactions in Active Securities is reasonable because it will
encourage liquidity and competition in actively traded securities on
the Exchange. The Exchange believes the new charges and credits for
member organizations and floor brokers are equitably allocated and not
unfairly discriminatory because similarly situated member organizations
and floor brokers will be subject to the same fee structure, and it
allocates a higher rebate to member organizations and floor brokers
that make significant contributions to market quality and that
contribute to price discovery by providing higher volumes of liquidity.
    The Exchange believes that increasing the per share charge for DMMs
that take liquidity from the Exchange is reasonable in light of the
changes to the DMM credits the Exchange is proposing, which are
designed to attract liquidity to the Exchange. The Exchange believes
that the additional credit for DMM transactions in Active Securities is
reasonable because it will encourage greater liquidity and competition
in actively traded securities on the Exchange. The Exchange recognizes
that the credit for a DMM whose providing liquidity is currently
between 10-15% of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity will
decrease from $0.0030 to $0.0026. The Exchange believes that this
change is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory
because it would result in credits being applied that are more
representative of the amount of liquidity added by such a DMM. In this
regard, the Exchange believes that a DMM that meets both the More
Active Securities Quoting Requirement and the More Active Securities
Quoted Size Ratio Requirement is likely to also be providing liquidity
that is reasonably close to, but not greater than, 15% of the NYSE's
total intraday adding liquidity in each such security for that month.
In contrast, the Exchange believes that a DMM whose providing liquidity
is greater than 15% of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity would
be adding liquidity above the amount associated with meeting both the
More Active Securities Quoting Requirement and the More Active
Securities Quoted Size Ratio Requirement. Accordingly, the Exchange
considers it reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to
provide a higher credit for a DMM whose providing liquidity is greater
than 15% of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity in each such
security for that month. Additionally, the Exchange believes that
reducing the credit for DMMs that provide relatively less liquidity
(10-15%) is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory,
because it would offset the cost of providing a higher credit to DMMs
that provide more liquidity (20-30%). The Exchange also believes that
increasing the credit for a DMM whose providing liquidity is between
20-30% of the NYSE's total intraday adding liquidity is reasonable,
equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory, because it will increase
the incentive for DMMs to provide liquidity but still promote multiple
sources of liquidity by decreasing the credit slightly when the DMM
provides liquidity that is more than 30% of the NYSE's total intraday
adding liquidity. The Exchange believes that the proposed changes are
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all similarly
situated DMMs will be subject to the same fee structure.
    The Exchange believes that increasing the credit per share for SLPs
that add liquidity to the Exchange with a per share price of $1.00 or
more if the SLP meets certain requirements is reasonable because the
incentives are reasonably related to an SLP's liquidity obligations.
The Exchange believes the new SLP credit for adding liquidity is
reasonable because it provides an added incentive for SLPs to provide
liquidity in their assigned securities. The Exchange believes that the
additional credit for SLP transactions in Active Securities is
reasonable because it will encourage liquidity and competition in
actively traded securities on the Exchange. The Exchange believes the
credits are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they are
open to all SLPs on an equal basis and provide discounts that are
reasonably related to the value to the Exchange's market quality
associated with higher volumes.
    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues. In such

an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider
adjusting, its fees and credits to remain competitive with other
exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment.

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 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

    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 foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \12\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \13\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the NYSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend 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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-NYSE-2012-50 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-NYSE-2012-50. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email 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 Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the 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-NYSE-2012-50 and should be
submitted on or before November 6, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-25322 Filed 10-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12104-12105]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4706]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Notice of
Proposed Construction or Alteration, Notice of Actual Construction or
Alteration, Project Status Report

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following collection of information was
published on December 22, 2011, vol. 76, no. 246, page 79752-79753. The
FAA uses the information collected on form 7460-1 to determine the
effect a proposed construction or alteration would have on air
navigation and the National Airspace System (NAS), and the information
collected on form 7460-2 to measure the progress of actual
construction.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by March 29, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy DePaepe at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0001.
    Title: Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, Notice of
Actual Construction or Alteration, Project Status Report.
    Form Numbers: FAA Forms 7460-1 and 7460-2.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: 49 U.S.C. 44718 states that the Secretary of
Transportation shall require notice of structures that may affect
navigable airspace, air commerce, or air capacity. These notice
requirements are contained in 14 CFR part 77. The information is
collected via FAA forms 7460-1 and 7460-2.
    Respondents: Approximately 110,325 airports.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: Approximately 15 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 22,425 hours.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on

the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC
20503.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

    Issued in Washington, DC on February 21, 2012.
Albert R. Spence,
FAA Assistant Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises
Business Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. 2012-4706 Filed 2-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 239 (Thursday, December 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71536-71537]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27186]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No.: FAA-2021-1138]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of a New Approval of Information Collection: Computerized
Neurocognitive Tests for Aeromedical Safety

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) invites public comments about our
intention to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval
for a new Information Collection (IC) effort. The collection involves
in-person sessions between researchers, certified pilots, and air
traffic control specialists (ATCS). Computerized neurocognitive tests
are a non-invasive way to measure cognitive function (e.g., attention,
working memory, information processing speed, reaction time) and are
used as part of the FAA's overall aeromedical physical exam process to
determine if a pilot is safe to operate an aircraft within the National
Airspace System (NAS) and if an ATCS is safe to return to duty.
Neurocognitive tests are required only for pilots and ATCSs with
certain medical conditions associated with aeromedically significant
cognitive impairments (i.e., not all pilots and ATCSs are tested). The
FAA needs to ensure that the tests and data used to maintain the safety
of the NAS are based on the most current scientific knowledge. The
purpose of this IC effort is to obtain updated pilot and ATCS normative
data for the FAA's current neurocognitive test and alternative
neurocognitive tests under consideration. The IC effort will be used to
potentially revise the FAA's Aviation Medical Examiners (AME) Guide,
update clinical practices, and assure aeromedical safety. Information
will be collected from representative pilots and ATCSs across the
United States, who will complete two different 1-hour neurocognitive
tests. Total IC effort/time per person will be approximately four hours
(i.e., to include check-in processing, informed consent, neurocognitive
test-taking, rest breaks, and participant debrief).

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by February 14, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Please send written comments:
    By Electronic Docket: https://www.regulations.gov (Enter docket
number into search field).
    By mail: Susan M. Jay, Ph.D., Bldg. 13, Rm 155C, 6500 S. MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73125.
    By fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan M. Jay, Ph.D., by email at:
[email protected]; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection effort to include: (a) Whether the proposed
information collection effort is necessary for the FAA's performance;
(b) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for the FAA to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collection

effort; and (d) ways that the burden could be minimized without
reducing the quality of the collected information. The agency will
summarize and/or include your comments in the request for OMB's
clearance of this information collection effort.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-XXXX.
    Title: Computerized Neurocognitive Tests for Aeromedical Safety.
    Form Numbers: List all forms.
    Type of Review: New information collection.
    Background: The FAA's mission and vision is to provide the safest,
most efficient aerospace system in the world as new users and
technologies integrate into the system. Computerized neurocognitive
tests are a non-invasive way to measure cognitive function (e.g.,
attention, working memory, information processing speed, reaction
time). Neurocognitive tests are used as part of the FAA's overall
aeromedical physical exam process to determine if a pilot is safe to
operate an aircraft within the NAS and if an ATCS is safe to return to
duty. Neurocognitive tests are required only for pilots and ATCSs with
certain medical conditions associated with aeromedically significant
cognitive impairments (i.e., not all pilots and ATCSs are tested). The
FAA needs to ensure that the tests and data used to maintain the safety
of the NAS based on the most current scientific knowledge. The purpose
of this IC effort is to obtain updated pilot and ATCS normative data
for the current test and alternative neurocognitive tests under
consideration. The IC effort will be used to potentially revise the
FAA's AME Guide, update clinical practices, and assure aeromedical
safety.
    Respondents: 1,500 respondents.
    Frequency: One-time collection.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 4-hours burden per
respondent-response.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 6,000 hours, total burden.

    Issued in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, on December 10, 2021.
Susan M. Jay,
Aviation Safety, Research Physiologist, Civil Aerospace Medical
Institute (CAMI), Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2021-27186 Filed 12-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 33 (Thursday, February 17, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 9042]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03425]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Effectiveness of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Docket Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cottontail Solar 2, LLC......................  EG22-19-000
Cottontail Solar 8, LLC......................  EG22-20-000
Black Bear Alabama Solar Tenant, LLC.........  EG22-21-000
Skipjack IA, LLC.............................  EG22-22-000
Arlington Energy Center III, LLC.............  EG22-23-000
Meadow Lake Solar Park LLC...................  EG22-24-000
Gruver Wind Interconnection, LLC.............  EG22-25-000
Parkway Generation Essex, LLC................  EG22-26-000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Take notice that during the month of January 2022, the status of
the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators became
effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR 366.7(a)
(2021).

    Dated: February 11, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-03425 Filed 2-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19343-19344]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8263]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings No. 1

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1899-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company, LLC
submits tariff filing per 154.403(d)(2): CEGT LLC--FUEL TRACKER--to be
effective 5/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110325-5067.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1900-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Midcontinent Express Pipeline LLC submits tariff
filing per 154.204: Tenaska Negotiated Rate Filing to be effective 4/1/
2011.
    Filed Date: 03/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110325-5076.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1901-000.
    Applicants: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company submits tariff
filing per 154.203: Compliance NCA Chevron to be effective 2/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110325-5100.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1902-000.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Company submits tariff filing per
154.601: Non-Conforming Agreement with Negotiated Rates to be effective
4/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110325-5132.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 6, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1903-000.
    Applicants: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company submits tariff
filing per 154.204: Chevron U.S.A. Inc. FA0910 to be effective 4/1/
2011.
    Filed Date: 03/28/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110328-5005.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 11, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1904-000.
    Applicants: Kinder Morgan Illinois Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Penalty Revenue Crediting Report of Kinder Morgan
Illinois Pipeline LLC.
    Filed Date: 03/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110325-5151.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 6, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings

must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or
before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not
necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a
compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket.
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants
parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or
protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In
reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or
protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served
on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 28, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-8263 Filed 4-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P