[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 12, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25956-25960]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10000]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0451; FRL-10022-72]

Sodium lauroyl sarcosinate; Exemption From the Requirement of a
Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of sodium lauroyl sarcosinate when used as
an inert ingredient in antimicrobial pesticide formulations applied to
food-contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy-processing
equipment, and food-processing equipment and utensils at an end-use
concentration not to exceed 10,000 parts per million (ppm). Clorox
Services Company representing Clorox Professional Products Company
submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), requesting establishment of an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level for residues of sodium lauroyl
sarcosinate when used in accordance with this exemption.

DATES: This regulation is effective May 12, 2021. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 12, 2021, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0451, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The 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
OPP Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with
limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status
information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marietta Echeverria, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Publishing Office's e-CFR site at
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0451 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
July 12, 2021. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0451, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Petition for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of September 30, 2020 (85 FR 61681) (FRL-
10014-74), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21
U.S.C. 346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-
11391) by Clorox Services Company representing Clorox Professional
Products Company, P.O. Box 493, Pleasanton, CA 94566-0803. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.940(a) be amended by establishing an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of sodium
lauroyl sarcosinate (CAS Reg. No. 137-16-6) when used as an inert
ingredient at an end-use concentration not to exceed 10,000 ppm in
antimicrobial pesticide formulations applied to food-contact surfaces
in public eating places, dairy-processing equipment, and food-
processing equipment and utensils. That document referenced a summary
of the petition prepared by Clorox Services Company, the petitioner,
which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There
were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.

III. Inert Ingredient Definition

    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the FFDCA
defines ``safe'' to mean that EPA has determined that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing an exemption and to ``ensure that
there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.''
    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no harm to human health. In order
to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the

inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a tolerance is not necessary to ensure that
there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate
exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure to sodium lauroyl sarcosinate,
including exposure resulting from the exemption established by this
action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with sodium
lauroyl sarcosinate follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by sodium lauroyl sarcosinate as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-
adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in
this unit.
    Sodium lauroyl sarcosinate is metabolized to the fatty acid lauric
acid and the amino acid sarcosine, both of which are found naturally in
food. Sodium lauroyl sarcosinate has low acute oral toxicity, and
results on a surrogate chemical showed low dermal toxicity. Two acute
inhalation studies in rats showed varying LC50 values
(lethal concentration for 50% of the animals), with one study reporting
the LC50 to be between 0.05-0.5 mg/L and the other
indicating a LC50 of 1 to 5 mg/L. These studies indicate
that sodium lauroyl sarcosinate is potentially toxic if inhaled.
However, inhalation exposure to sodium lauroyl sarcosinate is not
likely because it is unlikely that sodium lauroyl sarcosinate will
volatilize based on its physical/chemical properties (e.g. vapor
pressure and Henry's Law Constant). Sodium lauroyl sarcosinate caused
minimal eye irritation, did not cause skin irritation, and was not a
skin sensitizer.
    Repeat dose oral toxicity testing in rats include a 90-day, 6-
month, and 2-year study. In addition, a developmental toxicity test was
conducted. High repeated exposures to sodium lauroyl sarcosinate in the
diet resulted in minor irritation to the stomach in studies up to 2
years. This effect was not seen as an adverse effect of treatment and
therefore, the NOAEL for the 6-month and 2-year studies were 1,000 mg/
kg/day, the highest dose tested. When the test substance was
administered by gavage, the effects were more severe and include, in
addition to increasing thickness in the stomach wall, a yellow
discoloration of non-glandular gastric mucosa, more severe squamous
cell hyperplasia, hyperkeratosis/parakeratosis, inflammation and edema
of the non-glandular gastric mucosa. Systemic effects of sodium lauroyl
sarcosinate have not been observed in animal studies.
    Sodium lauroyl sarcosine tested negative for genotoxic effects in
various studies. Similarly, there was no evidence of carcinogenicity or
neuropathological changes or effects reported in any of the studies.
The agency does not believe sodium lauroyl sarcosine is carcinogenic or
neurotoxic.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    The local effects seen in the stomach in the 90-day and
developmental studies are the result of gavage dosing and are not
relevant for end point selection for the purposes of assessing this
chemical as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations. Therefore,
no toxicological significant endpoint of concern for sodium lauroyl
sarcosinate has been identified in the database.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food, feed uses, and drinking water. In
evaluating dietary exposure to sodium lauroyl sarcosinate, EPA
considered exposure under the proposed exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance. Sodium lauroyl sarcosinate is currently exempt from the
requirement of a tolerance under 40 CFR 180.1207 for use as an inert
ingredient (surfactant) at levels not to exceed 10% in pesticide
formulations containing glyphosate. Dietary exposure to sodium lauroyl
sarcosinate may occur from eating foods treated with pesticide
formulations containing this inert ingredient, from eating foods that
come in contact with surfaces treated with pesticide formulations
containing the inert ingredient, and drinking water containing runoff
from soils containing the treated crops. In addition, sodium lauroyl
sarcosinate is used as an additive in food packaging. However, no
toxicological endpoint of concern was identified for sodium lauroyl
sarcosinate and therefore, a quantitative assessment of dietary
exposure is not necessary.
    2. Non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is used
in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming pools, and
hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).
    Residential exposure to sodium lauroyl sarcosinate may occur based
on its use as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations registered
for residential uses. Additional non-dietary exposure may occur from
use of sodium lauroyl sarcosinate in household products and cosmetics.
However, no toxicological endpoint of concern was identified for sodium
lauroyl sarcosinate and therefore a quantitative residential exposure
assessment for sodium lauroyl sarcosinate was not conducted.
    3. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found sodium lauroyl sarcosinate to share a common
mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and sodium lauroyl
sarcosinate does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of this action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that sodium lauroyl sarcosinate does not have a common
mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding
EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of
toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see
EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    Section 408(b)(2)(C) of the FFDCA requires EPA to retain an
additional tenfold margin of safety in the case of threshold effects to
ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue. As noted in Unit IV.B., there is no indication of threshold

effects being caused by sodium lauroyl sarcosinate. Therefore, this
requirement does not apply to the present analysis. Moreover, due to
the lack of any toxicological endpoints of concern, EPA conducted a
qualitative assessment of magnesium sulfate, which does not use safety
factors for assessing risk, and no additional safety factor is needed
for assessing risk to infants and children.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    Taking into consideration all available information on sodium
lauroyl sarcosinate, EPA has determined that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm to the general population or any population
subgroup, including infants and children, will result from aggregate
exposure to sodium lauroyl sarcosinate. Therefore, the establishment of
an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance under 40 CFR
180.940(a) for residues of sodium lauroyl sarcosinate when used as an
inert ingredient in antimicrobial pesticide formulations applied to
food-contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy-processing
equipment, and food-processing equipment and utensils at a maximum end-
use concentration of 10,000 ppm is safe under FFDCA section 408.

V. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established under 40 CFR 180.940(a) for sodium lauroyl sarcosinate (CAS
Reg. No. 137-16-6) when used as an inert ingredient in antimicrobial
pesticide formulations applied to food-contact surfaces in public
eating places, dairy-processing equipment, and food-processing
equipment and utensils at an end-use concentration not to exceed 10,000
ppm.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition
submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order
12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review
under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions
to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the exemption in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VIII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule 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. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 4, 2021.
Marietta Echeverria,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, 40 CFR chapter I
is amended as follows:

PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. In Sec.  180.940, in paragraph (a), add alphabetically the inert
ingredient ``Sodium lauroyl sarcosinate'' to table 180.940(a) to read
as follows:

Sec.  180.940  Tolerance exemptions for active and inert ingredients
for use in antimicrobial formulations (Food-contact surface sanitizing
solutions).

* * * * *
    (a) * * *

                            Table 180.940(a)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Pesticide chemical          CAS reg. No.           Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
Sodium lauroyl sarcosinate.....        137-16-6   When ready for use,
                                                   the end-use
                                                   concentration is not
                                                   to exceed 10,000 ppm.

                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2021-10000 Filed 5-11-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 170 (Thursday, September 1, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54528-54529]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22360]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) of the Aircraft Certification
Service (AIR) Process for the Sequencing of Certification and
Validation Projects

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of availability and request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of and request for
public comments on the Aircraft Certification Service (AIR) standard
operating procedure (SOP) describing the process used to sequence
certification projects that are anticipated to take more than 40 hours
of FAA involvement to complete.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 3, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Send all comments on the SOP : AIR-100-001;
Standard Operating Procedure--Aircraft Certification Service Project
Sequencing to: Federal Aviation Administration, Aircraft Certification
Service, Aircraft Engineering Division, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, 5th Floor,
SW., Washington, DC 20024. Attn: Renton S. P. Bean, AIR-103. You may
deliver comments to: Federal Aviation Administration, 950 L'Enfant
Plaza, 5th Floor, SW., Washington, DC 20024, or electronically submit
comments to the following Internet address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Include in the subject line of your message the following:
SOP : AIR-100-001; Standard Operating Procedure--Aircraft
Certification Service Project Sequencing.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Renton S. Bean, Senior Aerospace
Engineer, Federal Aviation Administration, Aircraft Certification
Service, Aircraft Engineering Division, Technical and Administrative
Support Branch, AIR-103, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, 5th Floor, SW.,
Washington, DC 20024. Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    You are invited to comment on the SOP for the sequencing of
certification and validation projects listed in this notice by sending
such written data, views, or arguments to the above listed address.
Please identify ``SOP : AIR-100-001; Standard Operating
Procedure--Aircraft Certification Service Project Sequencing,'' as the
subject of your comments. You may also examine comments received on the
SOP before and after the comment closing date at the FAA's Aircraft
Engineering Division office located at, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, 5th Floor,
SW., Washington, DC 20024, weekdays except Federal holidays, between
8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. The Director of the Aircraft Certification
Service will consider all communications received on or before the
closing date before issuing the final document.

Background

    In 2005, the Federal Aviation Administration instituted a project
sequencing process to manage our limited resources to address both
continued operational safety and certification project work. This SOP
documents the process used for sequencing new certification and
validation projects worked in its Aircraft Certification Offices
(ACOs), Manufacturing Inspection District Offices (MIDOs), and
Directorate Standards Staffs. All applications for new certification
and validation projects requiring more than 40 hours of dedicated FAA
work effort are prioritized, on a national basis, based primarily on
the project's impact on safety and availability of resources. The
certification and validation programs include: Type certificate (TC),
Amended Type Certificate (ATC), Supplemental Type Certificated ATC),
Amended Supplemental Type Certificate (ASTC), Type Design Changes, Type
Validation, when the FAA is the Validating Authority, and Parts
Manufacturer Approval (PMA). Prior to 2005, the FAA accepted and
committed to work all certification and validation projects in the
order they were received, and frequently had to divert resources from
activities supporting our safety mission to meet certification
commitments. A means to manage resources such that applicants' requests
for services are properly balanced with the FAA's primary mission of
ensuring continued operational safety of the existing fleet is
essential. The FAA is publishing the SOP to ensure transparency of the
existing sequencing process and to

solicit feedback on how the process can be improved.

How to Obtain Copies

    You can get an electronic copy of the SOP : AIR-100-001;
Standard Operating Procedure--Aircraft Certification Service Project
Sequencing, via the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/, and then select Policy, or by contacting the person named in the
paragraph FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 26, 2011.
Susan J.M. Cabler,
Assistant Manager, Aircraft Engineering Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-22360 Filed 8-31-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 149 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46008-46009]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18786]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2011-0194; FRL-9709-4]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Idaho;
Boise-Northern Ada County Air Quality Maintenance Area; Second 10-Year
Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Idaho (the State). The Idaho State
Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) submitted the Northern Ada
County Air Quality Maintenance Area Second 10-year Carbon Monoxide
Maintenance Plan on February 10, 2011. In accordance with the
requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act), EPA is proposing
to approve the revision because the State adequately demonstrates that
the Boise-Northern Ada County Air Quality Maintenance Area will
maintain air quality standards for carbon monoxide (CO) through the
year 2022.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 4, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-

OAR-2011-0194, by any of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: John Chi, U.S. EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste
and Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle WA, 98101.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle WA, 98101. Attention: John Chi, Office of
Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT-107. Such deliveries are only accepted
during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.

Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section
of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to submit
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Chi at telephone number: (206)
553-1230, email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or Claudia Vergnani Vaupel at telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the above EPA, Region 10 address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information, please see the
direct final action, of the same title, which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register. EPA is approving the State's SIP
revision as a direct final rule without prior proposal because EPA
views this as a noncontroversial SIP revision and anticipates no
adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in
the preamble to the direct final rule. If EPA receives no adverse
comments, EPA will not take further action on this proposed rule.
    If EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will withdraw the direct
final rule and it will not take effect. EPA will address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

    Dated: July 23, 2012.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Adminstrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2012-18786 Filed 8-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 177)]
[Notices]
[Page 54046-54047]
[DOCID:fr13se06-73]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-584-000]

Viking Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in
FERC Gas Tariff

September 6, 2006.
    Take notice that on September 1, 2006, Viking Gas Transmission
Company (Viking) tendered for filing to become part of Viking's FERC
Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets to
become effective October 1, 2006:

Fourth Revised Sheet No. 38A
Third Revised Sheet No. 38E
Third Revised Sheet No. 38F

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or

protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC.
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-15167 Filed 9-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60694-60695]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23926]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93451; File No. SR-BX-2021-048]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Delay the
Implementation of Request for PRISM

October 28, 2021.
    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 October 14, 2021, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``BX'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the 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 delay the implementation of an amendment
to Options 3, Section 7(d)(1)(A) relating to ``Financial Information
eXchange'' or ``FIX'' in connection with offering BX Participants the
ability to utilize FIX to submit orders to its Price Improvement
Auction (``PRISM'') mechanism.

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
    BX received approval \3\ to amend Options 3, Section 7(d)(1)(A),
relating to FIX, to offer BX Participants the ability to utilize FIX to
submit orders to its PRISM mechanism. BX's amendment permitted it to
offer Participants a manner in which to send messages through FIX, to
other BX Participants, for the specific purpose of requesting another
BX Participant submit an ``Initiating Order'' \4\ along with the
sender's PRISM Order \5\ into the PRISM mechanism \6\ for execution
pursuant to Options 3, Section 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91124 (February 12,
2021), 86 FR 10363 (February 19, 2021) (SR-BX-2020-033) (Order
Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change To Utilize the FIX
Protocol To Submit Orders to BX's Price Improvement Auction
Mechanism) (``Approval Order'').
    \4\ An Initiating Order is an order executed against principal
interest or against any other order it represents as agent. See
Options 3, Section 13.
    \5\ A PRISM Order is an order submitted by a BX Participant that
it represents as agent on behalf of a Public Customer, broker
dealer, or any other entity, electronically, for execution. See
Options 3, Section 13.
    \6\ This proposal does not amend the PRISM rule within Options
3, Section 13 in connection with offering Participants the ability
to submit a Request for PRISM through FIX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the amendment expanded the capabilities of the FIX
protocol to allow a BX Participant (sender) to utilize FIX to send a
message to other BX Participants (responders) with an order the sender
represents as agent (``PRISM Order'') on behalf of a Public Customer,
broker dealer or other entity requesting the responders provide a
contra-side Initiating Order (a ``response'') and begin a PRISM auction
(collectively a ``Request for PRISM'').\7\ If a BX Participant desires
to respond to the request, the BX Participant adds an Initiating Order
to the sender's PRISM Order and submits the paired order directly into
PRISM, through FIX, for processing in accordance with Options 3,
Section 13.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Request for PRISM, if accepted and submitted into PRISM,
would become the ``PRISM Order'' pursuant to Options 3, Section 13.
    \8\ BX Participants may elect to ``opt in'' to receive Requests
for PRISM. BX Participants that do not elect to ``opt in'' will not
receive such requests. Once a BX Participant elects to receive
Requests for PRISM, they would receive all requests from any BX
Participant submitting a Request for PRISM. The BX Participant
cannot elect to only receive requests from certain Participants and
the sender may not elect to send the request to a select group of BX
Participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange originally intended to begin implementation of the
proposed rule change by June 30, 2021 \9\ and subsequently extended the
implementation until November 1, 2021.\10\ At this time, the Exchange
proposes to delay the implementation so that it would begin
implementation prior to June 30, 2022. The Exchange will issue an
Options Trader Alert to Participants with the date of implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Approval Order page 10364, ``The Exchange intends to
begin implementation of the proposed rule change by June 30, 2021.''
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91864 (May 12,
2021), 86 FR 27003 (May 18, 2021) (SR-BX-2021-022) (Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Delay the
Implementation of BX's Request for PRISM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by delaying the implementation of its amendment to Options 3,
Section 7(d)(1)(A) to allow the Exchange additional time to develop and
test this functionality. The Exchange believes that additional time to
develop and test this functionality will ensure a successful launch of
the functionality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The 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. The Exchange's proposal to
delay the adoption of the amendment to Options 3, Section 7(d)(1)(A)
does not impose an undue burden on competition. Delaying the
implementation of the functionality will allow the Exchange additional
time to develop and test the functionality.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public

interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \13\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \15\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\16\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay the
Exchange can extend the implementation date of the Request for PRISM
functionality, consistent with this filing, prior to the November 1,
2021 date specified in its previous filing. The Commission believes
that waiver of the operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission waives
the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule change
operative upon filing.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \17\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-BX-2021-048 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2021-048. 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 website (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 website 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-BX-2021-048 and should be submitted on
or before November 24, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-23926 Filed 11-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 91 (Thursday, May 13, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26250-26251]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10096]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA- FMCSA-2003-14223; FMCSA-2005-20027; FMCSA-2009-0054;
FMCSA-2010-0114; FMCSA-2010-0385; FMCSA-2011-0057; FMCSA-2012-0338;
FMCSA-2013-0021; FMCSA-2013-0022; FMCSA-2013-0023; FMCSA-2014-0010;
FMCSA-2014-0302; FMCSA-2016-0028; FMCSA-2016-0206; FMCSA-2019-0008]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 17
individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these individuals to continue to
operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision
requirement in one eye.

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions are applicable on the dates
stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates provided
below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, 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.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Dockets Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Comments

    To view comments go to www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket
number, FMCSA-2003-14223, FMCSA-2005-20027, FMCSA-2009-0054, FMCSA-
2010-0114, FMCSA-2010-0385, FMCSA-2011-0057, FMCSA-2012-0338, FMCSA-
2013-0021, FMCSA-2013-0022, FMCSA-2013-0023, FMCSA-2014-0010, FMCSA-
2014-0302, FMCSA-2016-0028, FMCSA-2016-0206, FMCSA-2019-0008 in the
keyword box, and click ``Search.'' Next, sort the results by ``Posted
(Newer-Older),'' choose the first notice listed, and click ``Browse
Comments.'' If you do not have access to the internet, you may view the
docket online by visiting Dockets Operations in Room W12-140 on the
ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to
help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting
Dockets Operations.

B. 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.transportation.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On March 25, 2021, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision
to renew exemptions for 17 individuals from the vision requirement in
49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and
requested comments from the public (86 FR 16018). The public comment
period ended on April 26, 2021, and no comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of
safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved
by complying with the current regulation Sec.  391.41(b)(10).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision
found in Sec.  391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at
least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual
acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with
corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen)
in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at
least 70[deg] in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability
to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red,
green, and amber.

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

IV. Conclusion

    Based on its evaluation of the 17 renewal exemption applications
and comments received, FMCSA confirms its decision to exempt the
following drivers from the vision requirement in Sec.  391.41(b)(10).
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following
groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of May and
are discussed below. As of May 7, 2021, and in accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following 15 individuals have
satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the
vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers 68 FR
10301, 68 FR 19596, 70 FR 2701, 70 FR 16886, 70 FR 16887, 72 FR 11425,
72 FR 18726, 74 FR 8842, 74 FR 11988, 74 FR 11991, 74 FR 21427, 75 FR
34209, 75 FR 47886, 75 FR 77942, 76 FR 5425, 76 FR 12216, 76 FR 17483,
76 FR 21796, 77 FR 52388, 77 FR 74731, 78 FR 10251, 78 FR 12811, 78 FR
12815, 78 FR 14405, 78 FR 14410, 78 FR 18667, 78 FR 20379, 78 FR 22596,
78 FR 22602, 78 FR 24296, 79 FR 51643, 79 FR 52388, 79 FR 64001, 80 FR
3723, 80 FR 12248, 80 FR 12251, 80 FR 12254, 80 FR 14220, 80 FR 15859,
80 FR 16500, 80 FR 16502, 80 FR 16509, 80 FR 29152, 81 FR 39320, 81 FR
60115, 81 FR 66720, 81 FR 71173, 81 FR 72642, 81 FR 80161, 81 FR 96165,
82 FR 13043, 82 FR 15277, 82 FR 18818, 82 FR 18949, 82 FR 23712, 83 FR
34661, 83 FR 56902, 84 FR 2311, 84 FR 2326, 84 FR 12665, 84 FR 16320,
84 FR 21401):

Michael L. Bergman (KS)
Keith E. Breeding (IN)
Lee A. Clason (NE)
Ryan E. Cox (WI)
Michael P. Curtin (IL)
David M. Field (NH)
Daryl G. Gibson (FL)
Terry R. Hunt (FL)
Oscar Juarez (ID)
Jose M. Limon-Alvarado (WA)
Eugene R. Lydick (VA)
Steve A. Reece (TN)
Gale L. Smith (PA)
Christopher M. Vincent (NC)
Steven M. Vujicic (IL)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2003-14223,
FMCSA-2005-20027, FMCSA-2009-0054, FMCSA-2010-0114, FMCSA-2010-0385,
FMCSA-2012-0338, FMCSA-2013-0021, FMCSA-2013-0022, FMCSA-2013-0023,
FMCSA-2014-0010, FMCSA-2014-0302, FMCSA-2016-0028, and FMCSA-2016-0206.
Their exemptions are applicable as of May 7, 2021, and will expire on
May 7, 2023.
    As of May 19, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b), James O. Cook (GA) has satisfied the renewal conditions for
obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for
interstate CMV drivers (76 FR 18824, 76 FR 29024, 79 FR 24298, 80 FR
20558, 82 FR 18949, 84 FR 12665).
    This driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2011-0057. The
exemption is applicable as of May 19, 2021, and will expire on May 19,
2023.
    As of May 21, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b), Samuel Sanchez (DE) has satisfied the renewal conditions for
obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for
interstate CMV drivers (84 FR 16333, 84 FR 27688).
    This driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2019-0008. The
exemption is applicable as of May 21, 2021, and will expire on May 21,
2023.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid
for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b).

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-10096 Filed 5-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P