Georgetown University, McDonough School of Business, to Commission,
dated May 25, 2018 (``Angel Letter I'').
53. Letter from Chester Spatt, Former Chief Economist, Commission, to
Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated May 25, 2018 (``Spatt
Letter'').
54. Letter from Joseph Kinahan, Managing Director, Client Advocacy &
Market Structure, TD Ameritrade, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated May 25, 2018 (``TD Ameritrade Letter'').
55. Letter from Edward S. Knight, Executive Vice President & Global
Chief Legal & Policy Officer, Nasdaq, Inc., to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated May 25, 2018 (``Nasdaq Letter I'').
56. Letter from Edward T. Tilly, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,

Cboe Global Markets, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission,
dated May 25, 2018 (``Cboe Letter I'').
57. Letter from Matt D. Lyons, Global Equity Trading Manager, and Peter
D. Stutsman, U.S. Regional Equity Trading Manager, The Capital Group
Companies, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated May 30,
2018 (``Capital Group Letter'').
58. Letter from Mike Rask, Chairman of the Board, and James Toes,
President & CEO, Security Traders Association, to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated May 31, 2018 (``STA Letter'').
59. Letter from Alan Harris, to Commission, dated May 31, 2018
(``Harris Letter'').
60. Letter from Elizabeth K. King, General Counsel & Corporate
Secretary, NYSE Group, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission,
dated May 31, 2018 (``NYSE Letter I'').
61. Letter from Kimberly Unger, CEO & Executive Director, The Security
Traders Association of New York, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 1, 2018 (``STANY Letter'').
62. Letter from John Ramsay, Chief Market Policy Officer, Investors
Exchange LLC, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated May 30,
2018 (``IEX Letter I'').
63. Market Commentary by Victor Lin, Credit Suisse, dated June 4, 2018
(``Credit Suisse Commentary'').
64. Letter from Rajesh Sharma, Corporate Secretary, Apache Corporation,
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 7, 2018 (``Apache
Letter'').
65. Letter from ``Danny Mulson'' to Commission, dated June 7, 2018
(``Mulson Letter I'').
66. Letter from J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, George Mason
University, Antonin Scalia Law School, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 11, 2018 (``Verret Letter I'').
67. Letter from James D. Rollins III, Chairman & Chief Executive
Officer, BancorpSouth Bank, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission,
dated June 11, 2018 (``BancorpSouth Letter'').
68. Letter from Jonathan A. Clark, Chief Executive Officer, and James
C. Dolan, Chief Compliance Officer, Luminex Trading & Analytics LLC, to
Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 12, 2018 (``Luminex
Letter'').
69. Letter from Mehmet Kinak, Vice President--Global Head of Systematic
Trading & Market Structure, and Jonathan Siegel, Vice President--Senior
Legal Counsel (Legislative & Regulatory Affairs), T. Rowe Price, to
Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 12, 2018 (``T. Rowe
Price Letter'').
70. Letter from Jon R. Moeller, Vice Chairman & Chief Financial
Officer, The Procter & Gamble Company, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 13, 2018 (``P&G Letter'').
71. Letter from William P. Neuberger, Managing Director, Global Co-Head
of Morgan Stanley Electronic Trading, and Andrew F. Silverman, Managing
Director, Global Co-Head of Morgan Stanley Electronic Trading, Morgan
Stanley & Co. LLC, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
June 14, 2018 (``Morgan Stanley Letter'').
72. Letter from Larry Harris, Fred V. Keenan Chair in Finance, USC
Marshall School of Business, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission,
dated June 15, 2018 (``Larry Harris Letter'').
73. Letter from Keith Neumeyer, President & CEO, First Majestic Silver
Corp., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 19, 2018
(``First Majestic Letter'').
74. Letter from ``Avarice Pleonexia'' to Commission, dated June 20,
2018 (``Pleonexia Letter'').
75. Letter from John M. Freeman, Executive Vice President, Chief Legal
Officer & Corporate Secretary, McDermott, to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 21, 2018 (``McDermott Letter'').
76. Letter from Janet McGinness, Corporate Secretary, Mastercard, Inc.,
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 21, 2018
(``Mastercard Letter'').
77. Letter from Mark Elliott, Chief Financial Officer, Level Brands,
Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 21, 2018
(``Level Brands Letter'').
78. Letter from Geir [Oslash]ivind Nyg[aring]rd, Chief Investment
Officer Asset Strategies, and Simon Emrich, Head of Market Structure
Strategies, Norges Bank Investment Management, to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 21, 2018 (``Norges Letter'').
79. Letter from Neal V. Fenwick, Executive Vice President & Chief
Financial Officer, ACCO Brands, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 21, 2018 (``ACCO Letter'').
80. Letter from Thomas R. Kubera, Chief Accounting Officer & Interim
Chief Financial Officer, SIFCO Industries, Inc., to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 21, 2018 (``SIFCO Letter'').
81. Letter from J.A. to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
June 22, 2018 (``JA Letter I'').
82. Letter from Timothy P. Olson, Senior Corporate Counsel & Corporate
Secretary, NorthWestern Corporation, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 22, 2018 (``NorthWestern Letter'').
83. Letter from Eric D. Koster, General Counsel & Secretary, Ethan
Allen Interiors, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
June 22, 2018 (``Ethan Allen Letter'').
84. Letter from Mark H. Collin, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer & Treasurer, Unitil Corporation, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 22, 2018 (``Unitil Corporation'').
85. Letter from Michael R. Peterson, Vice President, Corporate
Secretary, & Associate General Counsel, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 22, 2018 (``Johnson Letter'').
86. Letter from ``Anonymous Anonymous'' to Commission, dated June 22,
2018 (``Anonymous Letter I'').
87. Letter from Stephen C. Richter, Executive Vice President & CFO,
Weingarten Realty, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
June 22, 2018 (``Weingarten Letter'').
88. Letter from Richard L. Travis, Jr., Chief Financial Officer, Ennis,
Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 22, 2018
(``Ennis Letter'').
89. Letter from Bryan H. Fairbanks, Chief Financial Officer, Trex
Company, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 22, 2018
(``Trex Letter'').
90. Letter from John J. Manning, Vice President, General Counsel &
Secretary, Sensient Technologies Corporation, to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 25, 2018 (``Sensient Letter'').
91. Letter from John Christofilos, Senior Vice-President & Chief
Trading Officer, AGF Investments Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 25, 2018 (``AGF Letter'').
92. Letter from Dean Shigemura, Vice Chairman & Chief Financial
Officer, Bank of Hawaii Corporation, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,

Commission, dated June 25, 2018 (``Hawaii Letter'').
93. Letter from Jerry Fowden, Chief Executive Officer, Cott
Corporation, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 26,
2018 (``Cott Letter'').
94. Letter from Adam F. Wergeles, EVP & General Counsel, Leaf Group
Ltd., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 26, 2018
(``Leaf Letter'').
95. Letter from Haim Bodek, Managing Principal, and Stanislav
Dolgopolov, Chief Regulatory Officer, Decimus Capital Markets, LLC, to
Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 26, 2018 (``Decimus
Letter'').
96. Letter from Michael Sherman, Senior Vice President & General
Counsel, Genesis Healthcare, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 26, 2018 (``Genesis Letter'').
97. Letter from ``Anonymous Anonymous'' to Commission, dated June 27,
2018 (``Anonymous Letter II'').
98. Letter from Michael J. Schewel, Vice-President, General Counsel &
Secretary, Tredegar Corporation, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 27, 2018 (``Tredegar Letter'').
99. Letter from Nicholas C. Taylor, Chairman & CEO, Mexco Energy
Corporation, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 27,
2018 (``Mexco Letter'').
100. Letter from John Ramsay, Chief Market Policy Officer, Investors
Exchange LLC, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated June 27,
2018 (``IEX Letter II'').
101. Presentation from Security Traders Association to Commission,
dated June 28, 2018 (``STA Presentation'').
102. Letter from Timothy W. Gorman, Executive Vice President & Chief
Financial Officer, Energizer Holdings, Inc., to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 28, 2018 (``Energizer Letter'').
103. Letter from Christopher A. Iacovella, Chief Executive Officer,
American Securities Association, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 28, 2018 (``ASA Letter'').
104. Letter from W. Stancil Starnes, Chairman, President & Chief
Executive Officer, ProAssurance Corporation, to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 29, 2018 (``ProAssurance Letter'').
105. Letter from Isabel Janci, Vice President, Investor Relations, The
Home Depot, to Brent J. Field[s], Secretary, Commission, dated June 29,
2018 (``Home Depot Letter'').
106. Letter from Eric P. Sills, CEO & President, Standard Motor
Products, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated July
2, 2018 (``SMP Letter'').
107. Letter from Christopher T. Weber, Executive Vice President & Chief
Financial Officer, Halliburton, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated July 2, 2018 (``Halliburton Letter'').
108. Letter from Jennifer D. Whalen, Senior Vice President & Chief
Financial Officer, Era Group Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated July 2, 2018 (``Era Letter'').
109. Letter from David M. Weisberger, Head of Equities, ViableMkts, to
Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated July 2, 2018
(``ViableMkts Letter'').
110. Letter from John S. Fischer, General Counsel, Natural Grocers by
Vitamin Cottage, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
July 3, 2018 (``Natural Grocers Letter'').
111. Letter from Mark J. Airola, Senior Vice President, General
Counsel, Chief Administrative Officer & Corporate Secretary, Newpark
Resources, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated July
3, 2018 (``Newpark Letter'').
112. Letter from Jenny H. Parker, Senior Vice President--Finance,
Secretary & Treasurer, Haverty Furniture Companies, Inc., to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated July 3, 2018 (``Haverty Letter'').
113. Letter from Adam W. Miller, Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer,
Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings Inc., to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated July 5, 2018 (``Knight-Swift Letter'').
114. Letter from Tyler Gellasch, Executive Director, Healthy Markets
Association, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated July 6,
2018 (``Healthy Markets Letter II'').
115. Letter from R. Dale Lynch, Executive Vice President--Chief
Financial Officer, Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation, to Brent
J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated July 9, 2018 (``Farmer Mac
Letter'').
116. Letter from Elizabeth K. King, General Counsel & Corporate
Secretary, New York Stock Exchange, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated July 10, 2018 (``NYSE Letter II'').
117. Letter from ``Danny Mulson'' to Commission, dated July 10, 2018
(``Mulson Letter II'').
118. Letter from Maria Trainor, Vice President, General Counsel &
Secretary, Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated July 11, 2018 (``Ampco-Pittsburgh Letter'').
119. Letter from Ted A. Dosch, Executive Vice President--Finance &
Chief Financial Officer, Anixter International Inc., to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated July 13, 2018 (``Anixter
Letter'').
120. Letter from John K. Lines, SVP/Secretary & General Counsel,
National HealthCare Corporation, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated July 16, 2018 (``NHC Letter'').
121. E-mail from Patrick Healy, Founder & CEO, Issuer Network, to David
Shillman, Commission, dated July 17, 2018 (``Issuer Network E-mail'').
122. Letter from R. Scott Mahoney, Senior Vice President--General
Counsel & Secretary, AVANGRID, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated July 18, 2018 (``Avangrid Letter'').
123. Letter from J.A. to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
July 19, 2018 (``JA Letter II'').
124. Letter from Ruairidh Ross, Deputy General Counsel & Assistant
Secretary, HP Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
July 31, 2018 (``HP Letter'').
125. Letter from Glenn E. Tynan, Vice President & Chief Financial
Officer, Curtiss-Wright Corporation, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated August 3, 2018 (``Curtiss-Wright Letter'').
126. Letter from James J. Angel, Associate Professor of Finance,
Georgetown University, McDonough School of Business, to Commission,
dated August 3, 2018 (``Angel Letter II.'')
127. Letter from John Ramsay, Chief Market Policy Officer, Investors
Exchange LLC, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated August
8, 2018 (``IEX Letter III'').
128. Letter from Fiona Reynolds, Chief Executive Officer, Principles
for Responsible Investment, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission,
dated August 15, 2018 (``PRI Letter'').
129. Letter from Walter K. Compton, Executive Vice President & General
Counsel, Murphy Oil Corporation, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,

Commission, dated August 15, 2018 (``Murphy Letter'').
130. Letter from Sal Arnuk & Joe Saluzzi, Partners, Co-Founders & Co-
Heads of Equity Trading, Themis Trading LLC, to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated August 16, 2018 (``Themis Trading Letter
II'').
131. Letter from Jeffrey S. Davis, Nasdaq, Inc., to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated August 31, 2018 (``Nasdaq Letter II'').
132. Recommendation of the Investor Advisory Committee, dated September
13, 2018 (``IAC Recommendation'').
133. Letter from Sanda E. O'Connor, Chief Regulatory Affairs Officer,
JPMorgan Chase & Co., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
September 14, 2018 (``JPMorgan Letter'').
134. Letter from Anonymous Anonymous to Commission, dated September 21,
2018 (``Anonymous Letter III'').
135. Letter from John Ramsay, Chief Market Policy Officer, Investors
Exchange LLC, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
September 24, 2018 (``IEX Letter IV'').
136. Letter from Chris Concannon, President & Chief Operating Officer,
Cboe Global Markets, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission,
dated September 28, 2018 (``Cboe Letter II'').
137. Letter from Susan M. Olson, General Counsel, Investment Company
Institute, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated October 1,
2018 (``ICI Letter II'').
138. Letter from Katya Malinova, Mackenzie Investments Chair in
Evidence-Based Investment Management, DeGroote School of Business,
McMaster University, et al., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission,
dated October 1, 2018 (``CSA Letter'').
139. Letter from ``Richard P. Grasso,'' ``Grasso Plumbing LLC,'' to
Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated October 1, 2018 (``Grasso
Letter'').
140. Letter from Ira S. Lederman, W.R. Berkley Corporation, to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated October 2, 2018 (``Berkley
Letter'').
141. Letter from Stacey Cunningham, President, New York Stock Exchange,
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated October 2, 2018
(``NYSE Letter III'').
142. Letter from Rich Steiner, Electronic Trading Strategist, RBC
Capital Markets, to Brent Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated October
16, 2018 (``RBC Letter II'').
143. Letter from Elizabeth K. King, General Counsel & Corporate
Secretary, NYSE Group, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
November 9, 2018 (``NYSE Letter IV'').
144. Letter from Elizabeth K. King, General Counsel & Corporate
Secretary, NYSE Group, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission,
dated November 20, 2018 (``NYSE Letter V'').
145. Letter from J.A. to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
December 3, 2018 (``JA Letter III'').
146. Letter from J.W. Verret to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission,
dated December 4, 2018 (``Verret Letter II'').
147. Letter from Patrick J. Healy, Founder & CEO, Issuer Network, to
Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated December 14, 2018
(``Issuer Network Letter II'').
148. Letter from Jeffrey S. Davis, Vice President & Deputy General
Counsel, Nasdaq, Inc., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
December 17, 2018 (``Nasdaq Letter III'').

    Note: The following Exhibit will not appear in the Code of
Federal Regulations.

Exhibit 1: Data definitions for the Exchange Transaction Fee Summary

The table below represents the data model for the reporting
requirements of an Exchange Transaction Fee Summary. This data model
reflects the disclosures required by 17 CFR 242.610T(e) and the logical
representation of those disclosures to a corresponding XML element. The
Commission's XML schema is the formal electronic representation of this
data model.
 Concept--the information content as described in 17 CFR
242.610T(e) items 1 through 13.
 Element--a name for the XML element.
 Type--the XML data type, either a list of possible values or a
general type such as ``number''.
 Spot, Monthly--How the element appears in a record of that
type.
    [cir] R--Required. The XML file is not valid unless this element is
present.
    [cir] NA--Not applicable. The element may appear in the record but
its value is not to be used.
    [cir] O--Optional. The XML file is valid without that element;
whether it appears for a particular SRO, record type, test group, etc.,
depends on the actual fee being described. XML validation by itself
cannot determine this.
 When Absent--If the element is absent, its value is
interpreted as if it had been present with the value shown.
 Definition--Text to be included in the XML definition file
(``schema'').

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Concept               Element                    Type              Spot          Monthly         When absent                 Definition
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exchange........  exch                       Non-empty Text         R            R                  ...............  A required unique code to identify
                                                                                each exchange in the Transaction
                                                                                Fee Pilot.
Record Type.....  rt                         S or M                 R            R                  ...............  A required record type indicator.
                                                                                M, if the fee type reported is the
                                                                                monthly realized fee (average or
                                                                                median fee); S, if the fee type
                                                                                reported is a spot fee schedule
                                                                                (base or top tier fee).
Participant Type  ptcpt                      MM, Other or Blank     O            O                  Blank            MM, if the fees are for market
                                                                                makers, or else Other. Required
                                                                                for spot records if the exchange
                                                                                charged market makers and others
                                                                                different base and top tier fees.
                                                                                Required for monthly fee records
                                                                                if the exchange charged different
                                                                                average or median fees or pays
                                                                                different average or median fees.
                                                                                Otherwise blank or absent.
Pilot Group.....  grp                        1, 2, or C             R            R                  ...............  A required indicator that
                                                                                identifies the test or control
                                                                                group during the Pilot and post-
                                                                                Pilot Period. 1, 2--Test Groups 1,
                                                                                2; C--Control group.

Displayed.......  disp                       D, N, or B             R            R                  ...............  D--Displayed, N--Not displayed, B--
                                                                                Both. For spot fee type records,
                                                                                if the fees are the same between
                                                                                displayed and non-displayed
                                                                                liquidity, then the exchange may
                                                                                report both in a single ``B``
                                                                                record. For monthly records, this
                                                                                should be segmented into the
                                                                                average and median fee per share
                                                                                for displayed liquidity, and the
                                                                                average and median fee for non-
                                                                                displayed liquidity unless there
                                                                                are no differences between the
                                                                                average and median fees for
                                                                                displayed and non-displayed
                                                                                liquidity, in which case the
                                                                                exchange can report the average
                                                                                and median fee in a single ``B''
                                                                                record.
Top/Depth.......  topOrDepth                 T, D, or B             R            R                  ...............  T--Fees for top-of-book liquidity;
                                                                                D--Fees for depth-of-book
                                                                                liquidity; B--Both. For spot
                                                                                records, if the fees are the same
                                                                                between top-of-book and depth-of-
                                                                                book liquidity, then the exchange
                                                                                may report both fees in a single
                                                                                ``B`` record. For monthly records,
                                                                                if there are no differences
                                                                                between the fees for top-of-book
                                                                                and depth-of-book liquidity, then
                                                                                the exchange may include only the
                                                                                average and median fees in a
                                                                                single ``B`` record.
Start Date......  start                      YYYY-MM-DD             R            O                  ...............  The start date element must be
                                                                                present for a spot fee record, and
                                                                                the end element cannot appear
                                                                                alone. The effective date for any
                                                                                fee changes. This should
                                                                                correspond to the effective date
                                                                                referenced in the Form 19b-4 fee
                                                                                filings submitted to the
                                                                                Commission. This is needed in a
                                                                                monthly record only if fees
                                                                                changed on a day other than the
                                                                                first of the month; otherwise
                                                                                blank or absent.
End Date........  end                        YYYY-MM-DD or Blank    O            O                  Blank            The last date that a given fee is
                                                                                viable prior to any fee changes.
                                                                                This column will be blank unless a
                                                                                mid-month change to fees is made.
                                                                                This should correspond to the last
                                                                                date that a given fee is
                                                                                applicable prior to the effective
                                                                                date of the new fee reflected in
                                                                                Form 19b-4 fee filings submitted
                                                                                to the Commission to capture any
                                                                                revisions to transaction-based
                                                                                fees and rebates. This is needed
                                                                                in a monthly record only if fees
                                                                                changed on a day other than the
                                                                                first of the month.
Month and Year..  YearMonth                  YYYY-MM                NA           R                  ...............  The year and month of the monthly
                                                                                realized reported average and
                                                                                median per share fees.
Pre/Post........  preOrPost                  1, 2, or Blank         O            O                  Blank            An indicator variable needed only
                                                                                if the exchange changed fees on a
                                                                                day other than the first day of
                                                                                the month. Blank-there were no fee
                                                                                changes other than on the first
                                                                                day of the month. 1--The average
                                                                                and median are the pre-change
                                                                                average and median for the part of
                                                                                the month prior to the change. 2--
                                                                                The average and median are the
                                                                                post-change average and median for
                                                                                the part of the month after the
                                                                                change.
Base Taker Fee..  baseTakeFee                Number                 R            NA                 ...............  The Base Taker Fee is the standard
                                                                                per share fee assessed or rebate
                                                                                offered before any applicable
                                                                                discounts, tiers, caps, or other
                                                                                incentives are applied. Fees have
                                                                                a positive sign; rebates have a
                                                                                negative sign.
Top Tier Taker    topTierTakeFee             Number                 R            NA                 ...............  The Top Tier Taker Fee is the per
 Fee.                                                                                share fee assessed or rebate
                                                                                offered after all applicable
                                                                                discounts, tiers, caps, or other
                                                                                incentives are applied. Fees have
                                                                                a positive sign; rebates have a
                                                                                negative sign.
Average Taker     avgTakeFee                 Number                 NA           R                  ...............  The monthly average realized Taker
 Fee.                                                                                fee assessed or rebate offered per
                                                                                share by category (i.e., test
                                                                                group, participant type, displayed
                                                                                vs. non-displayed, and top-of-book
                                                                                vs. depth-of-book). Fees have a
                                                                                positive sign; rebates have a
                                                                                negative sign.
Median Taker Fee  medianTakeFee              Number                 NA           R                  ...............  The monthly median realized Taker
                                                                                fee assessed or rebate offered per
                                                                                share by category (i.e., test
                                                                                group, participant type, displayed
                                                                                vs. non-displayed, and top-of-book
                                                                                vs. depth-of-book), across broker-
                                                                                dealers. Fees have a positive
                                                                                sign; rebates have a negative
                                                                                sign.
Base Maker Fee..  baseMakeFee                Number                 R            NA                 ...............  The Base Maker Fee is the standard
                                                                                per share fee assessed or rebate
                                                                                offered before any applicable
                                                                                discounts, tiers, caps, or other
                                                                                incentives are applied. Fees have
                                                                                a positive sign; rebates have a
                                                                                negative sign.
Top Tier Maker    topTierFee                 Number                 R            NA                 ...............  The Top Tier Maker Fee is the per
 Fee.                                                                                share fee assessed or rebate
                                                                                offered all applicable discounts,
                                                                                tiers, caps, or other incentives
                                                                                are applied per share. Fees have a
                                                                                positive sign; rebates have a
                                                                                negative sign.
Average Maker     avgMakeFee                 Number                 NA           R                  ...............  The monthly average realized Maker
 Fee.                                                                                fee assessed or rebate offered per
                                                                                share by category (i.e., test
                                                                                group, participant type, displayed
                                                                                vs. non-displayed, and top-of-book
                                                                                vs. depth-of-book). Fees have a
                                                                                positive sign; rebates have a
                                                                                negative sign.

Median Maker Fee  medianMakeFee              Number                 NA           R                  ...............  The monthly median realized Maker
                                                                                fee assessed or rebate offered per
                                                                                share by category (i.e., test
                                                                                group, participant type, displayed
                                                                                vs. non-displayed, or top-of-book
                                                                                vs. depth-of-book), across broker-
                                                                                dealers. Fees have a positive
                                                                                sign; rebates have a negative
                                                                                sign.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2018-27982 Filed 2-19-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 28, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40392-40395]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15733]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2019-0708; FRL-8711-01-R7]

Air Plan Approval; Iowa; Polk County; State Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Iowa State Implementation Plan (SIP) to
include recent changes to the Polk County Board of Health Rules and
Regulations in addition to revisions from past submittals. The proposed
revisions update definitions and references to the effective dates of
Federal rules approved into the State's SIP, prohibit burning of
demolished buildings, update references to methods and procedures for
performance test/stack test and continuous monitoring systems, and
revise permitting exemptions. These proposed revisions will not
adversely impact air quality and will ensure consistency between the
State and Federally approved rulemakings.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 27, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2019-0708 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without
change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Written
Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Doolan, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201
Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number (913) 551-
7719; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. What SIP revisions are being proposed by the EPA?
IV. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP been met?
V. What actions are proposed?
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Written Comments

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2019-
0708 at https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

II. What is being addressed in this document?

    The EPA is proposing to approve a submission from the State of Iowa
to revise its SIP to incorporate recent updates to Chapter 10 of Polk
County's Code of Regulation pertaining to air quality. The Clean Air
Act (CAA) allows authorized States to delegate portions of the Act's
implementation and enforcement to local governments such

as Polk County. The proposed revisions to the Iowa SIP incorporate Polk
County's updated definitions and references to the effective dates of
Federal rules approved into the State's SIP, update references to
methods and procedures for performance test/stack test and continuous
monitoring systems, prohibit burning of demolished buildings, and
revise permitting exemptions. The proposed revisions to the Iowa SIP
also include changes to Polk County's public notice and participation
requirements to allow permit modifications to be published online
rather than in area newspapers which is consistent with recent
revisions to Iowa's SIP (83 FR 191, October 2, 2018).
    The EPA is not acting on portions of Polk County Chapter V that
amend Standards for Marijuana Production and Marijuana Processing
(section 5-21), Permits for New and Existing Stationary Sources, and
Chapter 10-59, Permit Fees, that pertain to Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) regulations because Iowa has not delegated the PSD
program authority to Polk County.
    The EPA is also proposing to approve minor changes to the text of
various ordinances that were previously submitted to the EPA, but were
inadvertently omitted from previous actions. These revisions were
contained in submittals dated December 3, 2007, September 1, 2009,
September 19, 2011, April 15, 2014, and November 25, 2015.

III. What SIP revisions are being proposed by the EPA?

    The EPA is proposing approval of the revisions to the Iowa SIP to
incorporate revisions to Chapter V of the Polk County Board of Health
Rules and Regulations listed below. A Technical Support Document (TSD)
with a detailed description of the proposed revisions and the rationale
for approval has been prepared by the EPA and is provided in the docket
for this proposed action.
    Article I, In General. The proposed rule changes update the
references to effective dates and definitions. The rule changes are
administrative updates that do not negatively impact air quality and
ensure greater consistency with the Iowa regulations.
    Article III, Incineration and Open Burning. Polk County amended
this article to add a prohibition against burning demolished buildings.
The addition of the prohibition on burning of demolished buildings will
lead to reduced particulates and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) thus
improving air quality.
    Article VI, Emission Of Air Contaminants From Industrial Processes.
Section 5-16 is being amended to include a general provision
referencing paragraph (n) which applies to New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS). NSPS is delegated by Iowa to Polk County but not SIP-
approved by the EPA. The EPA proposes to approve the general provision
because it pertains to a delegated authority.
    Article VII, Performance Test For Stack Emission Test. In section
5-18, paragraph (a)(2) the title and references to ``stack sampling''
are being revised to read ``performance test (stack test)'' and
``department'' is being changed to read ``local program.'' These minor
changes in wording do not impact air quality. References to performance
test methods and specifications and quality assurance procedures for
performance evaluations of continuous monitoring systems are being
updated to be consistent with the currently approved references in Iowa
code. Thus, for consistency, the EPA is proposing to approve these
updates.
    Article X, Permits, Division 1, Construction Permits. Section 5-28,
Construction Permit Required, is being amended to add ``Air Quality
Division (AQD)'' to the title. Subparagraphs (1) through (4) of
paragraph (c) are not highlighted in Iowa's SIP revision request as new
text. After consulting with Iowa, the State submitted an Addendum dated
July 21, 2020, to request EPA approval of paragraphs (1) though (4) of
section 5-28 into the SIP, and stated that section 5-28 has been
submitted to EPA for approval in the past. The text of these paragraphs
is substantively similar to that of Iowa 22.1 (455B) and 22.3 (b) which
EPA has approved into Iowa's SIP; thus, the EPA recommends approval of
Paragraphs (a) through (c), including subparagraphs (1) through (4) of
paragraph (c), to ensure consistency between Polk County's and Iowa's
air permitting regulations.
    The title of article X, section 5-29, is being revised to add that
the application is for a ``construction'' permit and the acronym
``AQD.'' The new title now reads ``Application for a Construction
Permit (AQD).'' Also, this section is being revised to add a paragraph
title, ``construction permit applications,'' to revise ``health
officer'' to now read ``local program,'' to eliminate that the
applications must be submitted ``in duplicate,'' and to add
``applications'' to the list of items to be submitted by entities
seeking a construction permit. The EPA proposes to approve these
changes into the Iowa SIP because they clarify the construction
permitting process and reduce the number of hard copies that need to be
submitted.
    Polk County has added the acronym ``AQD'' representing the Air
Quality Division to title X, sections 5-30, Processing of Applications
for Construction Permits, section 5-31, Issuance of Construction
Permits, and section 5-32, Denial of Permit. These additions represent
minor clarifications. As such, the EPA proposes to approve them.
    The acronym ``AQD'' has also been added to title X, section 5-33,
Exemptions from Permit Requirements. In item (50), Production Welding,
``stationary source'' is replacing ``facility.'' Further, the equations
used to calculate the exemption in item (50) are being revised. The
calculations make item (50) more stringent than calculations set forth
in the welding exemption in the EPA-approved Iowa SIP, section
22.1(2)(ff)(1).
    Item (62) has been added to section 5-33. Item (62) exempts from
construction permitting non-road diesel engines used for periodic
testing and maintenance of natural gas compressor engines. The
exemption is consistent with EPA-approved construction permitting
requirements in Chapter 22.1(2) ``oo'' of the Iowa code. The EPA
proposes to approve item (62) into the Iowa SIP as it makes Polk
County's authorities consistent with Iowa's.
    Article X, Permits, Division 2, Operating Permits. ``Annual
Operating'' is being added to the title of section 5-37 to clarify the
type of permit to which the section pertains. The acronym ``AQD'' is
being added as well. The reference to ``department'' is being changed
to ``Local Program.'' Also, this section is being updated to be
consistent with Iowa code regarding public notice requirements. The
State made revisions that address public participation requirements for
its PSD permitting program to reflect updates to the Federal
regulations, at 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, published October 18, 2016.
The revision removes the requirements for advertisement in a newspaper
of general circulation in each region in which the proposed source will
be constructed and provides for posting of the public comment period on
a website identified by the State. The language and intent of the
revisions to the Polk County rules and regulations are consistent with
the Federal regulations and the EPA-approved Iowa SIP. Thus, the EPA is
proposing to approve these Polk County revisions into the Iowa SIP.
    The title for section 5-39 is being revised to clarify that the
listed exemptions are for ``Annual Operating'' Permits. Revisions to
item (43) update the language from ``facility'' to ``stationary
source(s)'' and correct the

equation for exemption from permitting for welding activities to agree
with that in Iowa code. The EPA is proposing to approve these revisions
because they clarify the permit exemptions.
    Items (56), Equipment related to research and development
activities at a stationary source, (57), Exemptions for non-road diesel
combustion engines, and item (58), fuel burning equipment for indirect
heating or cooling with a capacity less than one million Btu per hour
input when burning No. 1 or No. 2 fuel oil, are consistent with
previously approved exemptions in section 22.1(b) of the Iowa SIP. In
paragraphs (57) and (58), Polk County has elected to be more stringent
in its regulations than the EPA-approved Iowa code for similar
operations. The EPA is proposing to approve items (56), (57) and (58)
into the Iowa SIP.
    Section 5-39, paragraph (b) was not highlighted as new language in
Iowa's SIP revision request; however, following discussions with Iowa,
the state indicated that this paragraph had been requested for approval
in a previous submittal, and requested approval of this paragraph in
its July 21, 2020, Addendum. This paragraph discusses exemptions from
permitting for smaller liquified or natural gas fired heaters,
residential wood or pellet heaters, cook stoves and fireplace, as well
as jet engines, marine engines and locomotives. This paragraph is
consistent with Iowa code section 22.1 which is EPA-approved; thus, the
EPA is proposing to approve the same Polk County exemptions.
    Revisions to sections 5-40, 5-42, 5-43 and 5-44 are clarifications
that the permits discussed are ``Annual Operating'' permits issued by
AQD. The EPA is proposing to approve these minor editorial changes, as
there is no impact to air quality.

IV. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP been met?

    The submittals met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also
satisfies the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In
addition, these proposed revisions meet the substantive SIP
requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing
regulations. These proposed revisions are also consistent with
applicable EPA requirements of title V of the CAA and 40 CFR part 70.

V. What actions are proposed?

    The EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Iowa SIP to
incorporate the revisions to chapter 5, Air Pollution, of the Polk
County Board of Health Rules and Regulations. The proposed revisions
clarify rules, make revisions and corrections, and rescind portions of
rules no longer relevant to the air program. The EPA has determined
that approval of these proposed revisions will not adversely impact air
quality and will ensure consistency between the local, State and
federally-approved rules, and will ensure Federal enforceability of the
State's revised air program rules.

VI. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is proposing to include regulatory text
in an EPA final rule that includes incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to
incorporate by reference the Iowa Regulations described in the proposed
amendments to 40 CFR 52 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 7 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
proposed rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: July 19, 2021.
Edward H. Chu,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart Q-Iowa

0
2. In Sec.  52.820, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry ``Chapter V'' under the heading ``Polk County'' to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.820  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                            Approved Iowa Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
          Iowa citation                   Title         effective date   EPA approval date       Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Iowa Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Commission [567]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Polk County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter V........................  Polk County Board          11/30/18  [Date of             Article I, Section
                                    of Health Rules                      publication of the   5-2, definition of
                                    and Regulations                      final rule in the    ``anaerobic
                                    Air Pollution                        Federal Register],   lagoon'' and
                                    Chapter V.                           [Federal Register    ``variance;''
                                                                         citation of the      Article III,
                                                                         final rule].         Incineration and
                                                                                Open Burning,
                                                                                Section 5-7(d)
                                                                                Variance
                                                                                Application;
                                                                                Article VI,
                                                                                Sections 5-16(n),
                                                                                (o) and (p);
                                                                                Article VIII;
                                                                                Article IX,
                                                                                Sections 5-27(3)
                                                                                and (4); Article
                                                                                X, Section 5-28,
                                                                                subsections (a)
                                                                                through (c), and
                                                                                Article X, Section
                                                                                5-35(b)(5);
                                                                                Article XIII;
                                                                                Article XIV; and
                                                                                Article XVI,
                                                                                Section 5-75B are
                                                                                not part of the
                                                                                SIP.

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2021-15733 Filed 7-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 215 (Friday, November 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68895-68897]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28316]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. Docket No. FMCSA-2006-2575; FMCSA-2011-0193; FMCSA-2011-
0194; FMCSA-2013-0183; FMCSA-2013-0186; FMCSA-2013-0188; FMCSA-2013-
0189]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions of 90
individuals from its rule prohibiting persons with insulin-treated
diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating commercial motor vehicles
(CMVs) in interstate commerce. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt
individuals from this rule if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to
or greater than the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these CMV drivers.

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions are effective from the dates
stated in the discussions below. Comments must be received on or before
December 7, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. [Docket No. FMCSA-2006-
2575; FMCSA-2011-0193; FMCSA-2011-0194; FMCSA-2013-0183; FMCSA-2013-
0186; FMCSA-2013-0188; FMCSA-2013-0189], 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 or Courier: 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 number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on January
17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-113,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations 2-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The statute also allows the Agency to renew
exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The 90 individuals listed
in this notice have recently become eligible for

a renewed exemption from the diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(3), which applies to drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce.
The drivers remain in good standing with the Agency, have maintained
their required medical monitoring and have not exhibited any medical
issues that would compromise their ability to safely operate a CMV
during the previous 2-year exemption period.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 90 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. These 90 drivers
remain in good standing with the Agency, have maintained their required
medical monitoring and have not exhibited any medical issues that would
compromise their ability to safely operate a CMV during the previous 2-
year exemption period. Therefore, FMCSA has decided to extend each
exemption for a renewable two-year period. Each individual is
identified according to the renewal date.
    The exemptions are renewed subject to the following conditions: (1)
That each individual submit a quarterly monitoring checklist completed
by the treating endocrinologist as well as an annual checklist with a
comprehensive medical evaluation; (2) that each individual reports
within 2 business days of occurrence, all episodes of severe
hypoglycemia, significant complications, or inability to manage
diabetes; also, any involvement in an accident or any other adverse
event in a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or not it is related to an
episode of hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual submit an annual
ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report; and (4) that each individual
provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the employer for
retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep a copy in his/her
driver's qualification file if he/she is self-employed. The driver must
also have a copy of the certification when driving, for presentation to
a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. The following groups of
drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of November and are
discussed below.
    As of November 1, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 17 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers
with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce. (78 FR 50482; 78 FR
65754):

John K. Abels (IL)
Dean A. Bacon (IN)
Philip E. Banks (OH)
Anthony M. Bride (NJ)
Charles E. Dailey (AL)
Kenneth D. Denny (WA)
Adam M. Hogue (MS)
Allen D. LaFave (ND)
Greg P. Mason (NY)
Thomas D. Miller (MT)
Douglas A. Mulligan (KY)
David G. Peters (PA)
Robert J. Rispoli, Jr. (NY)
Mike P. Senn (MN)
Hames H. Suttles (AL)
Gregory F. Wendt (NE)
Michael J. Wickstrom (MI)

    The drivers were included in Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0183. Their
exemptions are effective as of November 1, 2015 and will expire on
November 1, 2017.
    As of November 6, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following individual, George J. Ehnot (PA), has
satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the
rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate
commerce (78 FR 56988; 78 FR 67459).
    The driver was included in Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0186. The
exemption is effective as of November 6, 2015 and will expire on
November 6, 2017.
    As of November 9, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 11 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers
with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce. (78 FR 55460; 78 FR
69795):

Mark A. Blanton (IN)
Howard T. Cash (IL)
Heath J. Chesser (AL)
Kevin F. Connacher (PA)
Darryl A. Daniels (OH)
Carrie L. Frisby (CA)
Dean M. Keeven (MI)
Christopher A. Labudde (IL)
Brian A. Mankowski (IL)
Robert E. Welling (OH)
Keith Weymouth (ME)

    The drivers were included in Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0193. Their
exemptions are effective as of November 9, 2015 and will expire on
November 9, 2017.
    As of November 12, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 24 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers
with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce. (78 FR 56988; 78 FR
67459):

Charles E. Andersen (MN)
Philip B. Blythe (IL)
Ryan T. Byndas (AZ)
Winfred G. Clemenson (WA)
Michael C. Crewse (IL)
James D. Crosson, Jr. (MN)
Bruce E. Feltenbarger (MI)
Charles A. Fleming (VA)
Brian W. Hannah (UT)
Michael P. Huck (MI)
Van K. Jarrett (KY)
Keith W. Lewis (MO)
Eugene M. Mikell (NH)
Ronny J. Moreau (NH)
James M. O'Rourke (MA)
Joshua T. Paumer (MT)
Vladimir B. Petkov (MO)
Luther S. Pickell (KS)
Robert J. Pulliam (AZ)
Andrew W. Sprester (ND)
Vincent J. Terrizzi, Sr. (PA)
Daniel C. Theis (FL)
Richard A. White (TN)
Mark A. Winning (IL)

    The drivers were included in Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0186. Their
exemptions are effective as of November 12, 2015 and will expire on
November 12, 2017.
    As of November 16, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 13 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers
with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce. (76 FR 61140; 76 FR
71111):

Mark D. Andersen (IA)
David A. Basher (MA)
Brian H. Berthiaume (VT)
Eric D. Blocker, Sr. (NC)
Berry W. Campbell (WI)
Raymond A. Jack (WA)
Quency T. Johnson (WI)
Kenny B. Keels, Jr. (SC)
Jason M. Pritchett (MI)
Steven R. Sibert (MN)
Cassie J. Silbernagel (SD)
Lewis B. Taylor (IL)
James A. Terilli (NY)

    The drivers were included in Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0194. Their
exemptions are effective as of November 16, 2015 and will expire on
November 16, 2017.
    As of November 19, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following individual, Marshall H. Evans (IL), has
satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the
rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate
commerce (76 FR 63280; 76 FR 76398).
    The driver was included in Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0188. The
exemption

is effective as of November 19, 2015 and will expire on November 19,
2017.
    As of November 20, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 22 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers
with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce. (71 FR 58464; 71 FR
67201):

John N. Anderson (MN)
Allan C. Boyum (MN)
Terry L. Brantley (NC)
Steven E. Brechting (MI)
Scott A. Carlson (WI)
Joseph L. Coggins (SC)
Stephanie D. Fry (WY)
Robert W. Gaultney, Jr. (MD)
Paul T. Kubish (WI)
David M. Levy (NY)
Sterling C. Madsen (UT)
David F. Morin (CA)
Jeffrey J. Morinelli (NE)
Ronald D. Murphy (WV)
Charles B. Page (PA)
John A. Remaklus (OH)
Michael D. Schooler (IN)
Arthur L. Stapleton, Jr. (OH)
Carolyn J. Taylor (IN)
Jeffrey M. Thew (WA)
Barney J. Wade (MS)
Dennis D. Wade (IL)

    The drivers were included in Docket No. FMCSA-2006-2575. Their
exemptions are effective as of November 20, 2015 and will expire on
November 20, 2017.
    As of November 22, 2015, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following individual, Steven R. Auger (NH), has
satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the
rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate
commerce (76 FR 63295; 76 FR 76400).
    The driver was included in Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0189. The
exemption is effective as of November 22, 2015 and will expire on
November 22, 2017.
    Each of the 90 drivers in the aforementioned groups qualifies for a
renewal of the exemption. They have maintained their required medical
monitoring and have not exhibited any medical issues that would
compromise their ability to safely operate a CMV during the previous 2-
year exemption period.
    These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each of the
90 drivers for a period of two years is likely to achieve a level of
safety equal to that existing without the exemption. The drivers were
included in docket numbers FMCSA-2006-2575; FMCSA-2011-0193; FMCSA-
2011-0194; FMCSA-2013-0183; FMCSA-2013-0186; FMCSA-2013-0188; FMCSA-
2013-0189.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by December 7, 2015.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 90 individuals from rule
prohibiting persons with ITDM from operating CMVs in interstate
commerce in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the medical condition of each applicant for an exemption from
rule prohibiting persons with ITDM from operating CMVs in interstate
commerce. That information is available by consulting the above cited
Federal Register publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket numbers FMCSA-2006-2575; FMCSA-
2011-0193; FMCSA-2011-0194; FMCSA-2013-0183; FMCSA-2013-0186; FMCSA-
2013-0188; FMCSA-2013-0189 and click the search button. When the new
screen appears, click on the blue ``Comment Now!'' button on the right
hand side of the page. On the new page, enter information required
including the specific section of this document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. If
you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of
the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number
FMCSA-2006-2575; FMCSA-2011-0193; FMCSA-2011-0194; FMCSA-2013-0183;
FMCSA-2013-0186; FMCSA-2013-0188; FMCSA-2013-0189 and click ``Search.''
Next, click ``Open Docket Folder'' and you will find all documents and
comments related to the proposed rulemaking.

    Issued on: October 29, 2015.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-28316 Filed 11-5-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 245 (Tuesday, December 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79649-79650]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32156]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Air Traffic Procedures Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public that a
meeting of the Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Procedures
Advisory Committee (ATPAC) will be held to review present air traffic
control procedures and practices for standardization, revision,
clarification, and upgrading of terminology and procedures.

DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, February 23, 2016 from 12:45
p.m. to 4:30 p.m., and Wednesday, February 24, 2016 from 8:45 a.m. to
4:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at CGH Technologies, Inc., 600
Maryland

Ave SW., Suite 800W, Washington, DC 20024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Ms. Heather Hemdal, ATPAC Executive
Director, 600 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. App.2), notice is
hereby given of a meeting of the ATPAC to be held Tuesday, February 23,
2016 from 12:45 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., and Wednesday, February 24, 2016
from 8:45 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
    The agenda for this meeting will cover a continuation of the
ATPAC's review of present air traffic control procedures and practices
for standardization, revision, clarification, and upgrading of
terminology and procedures. It will also include:
    1. Call for Safety Items
    2. Approval of minutes of the previous meeting
    3. Introduction of New Areas of Concern or Miscellaneous items
    4. Items of Interest
    5. Status updates to existing Areas of Concern
    6. Discussion and agreement of location and dates for subsequent
meetings.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
available. With the approval of the Chairperson, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons desiring to attend
and persons desiring to present oral statements should notify Ms.
Heather Hemdal no later than February 16, 2016. Any member of the
public may present a written statement to the ATPAC at any time at the
address given above.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 16, 2015.
Heather Hemdal,
Executive Director, Air Traffic Procedures Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2015-32156 Filed 12-21-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 153 (Thursday, August 10, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 54392]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17180]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. 2023-0088]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Airman
Knowledge Test Registration Collection

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 of a renewed collection. The
collection involves the voluntary submission of information for
registration of an Airman Knowledge Test as part of the FAA Airman
Certification Process. The information collected is necessary to ensure
compliance and proper registration of an individual for the necessary
knowledge test for the certification or rating pursued by the
individual.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by September 11, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--
Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan C. Smith 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, 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.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0792.
    Title: Airman Knowledge Test Registration Collection.
    Form Numbers: There are no forms associated with this collection.
    Type of Review: Renewed information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on January, 17, 2023 (88 FR 2752). Individuals pursuing
an FAA certificate or rating to operate in the National Airspace System
(NAS) must meet the standards established in the FAA regulations
specific to the certificate sought by the individual. FAA certification
requires that an individual must successfully pass an Airman Knowledge
Test as part of the requirements to obtain an FAA certificate or
rating. The FAA develops and administers 90 different knowledge tests
in many different areas that are required as part of the overall airman
certification process.
    Airman Knowledge Tests are administered at approved Knowledge
Testing Centers by an approved test proctor who is required to
administer the appropriate Airman Knowledge Test to the individual
pursuing FAA certification. Individuals taking an FAA Airman Knowledge
Test must provide the following information to be collected in order to
complete the registration process before the administration of the
Airman Knowledge Test: Name, FAA Tracking Number (FTN), physical
address, Date of Birth, email address, photo identification, phone
number, test authorization (credentials of the individual such as an
instructor endorsement), and previous number of test attempts.
    The information provided by the individual is collected and stored
electronically in the application used for test registration and
delivery. This information is used to determine the identify and
eligibility of the individual for compliance of FAA certification
requirements.
    Respondents: 224,474 annually.
    Frequency: n/a.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 2 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 7,482 hours annually.

224,474 respondents x 2 minutes each = 448,948 minutes,
448,948 minutes/60 minutes in an hour = 7,482 hours annually.

    Issued in Oklahoma City, OK, on August 7, 2023.
Ryan C. Smith,
Airman Knowledge Testing Program Manager, Airman Testing Standards
Branch (AFS-630).
[FR Doc. 2023-17180 Filed 8-9-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 4, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14542-14543]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06859]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0118]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Revision of an Approved
Information Collection: Inspection, Repair and Maintenance

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

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FMCSA
announces its plan to submit the Information Collection Request (ICR)
described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its
review and approval and invites public comment. The information
collection concerns records of inspection, repair, and maintenance of
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs). The FMCSA requests approval to revise
and renew an ICR entitled, ``Inspection, Repair and Maintenance.''
FMCSA collects this information to ensure that motor carriers have
adequate documentation of their inspection, repair, and maintenance
programs necessary to reduce the likelihood of CMV crashes.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before June 4, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket Number FMCSA-2018-0118 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Operations; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
docket number. For detailed instructions on submitting comments, see
the Public Participation heading below. 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.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the
online instructions for accessing the dockets, or go to the street
address listed above.
    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.
    Public Participation: The Federal eRulemaking Portal is available
24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You can obtain electronic
submission and retrieval help and guidelines under the ``help'' section
of the Federal eRulemaking Portal website. If you want us to notify you
that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed,
stamped envelope or postcard, or print the acknowledgement page that
appears after submitting comments online. Comments received after the
comment closing date will be included in the docket and will be
considered to the extent practicable.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mike Huntley, Vehicle and Roadside
Operations Division, Department of Transportation, Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, West Building 6th Floor, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background: The Secretary of Transportation
(Secretary) is authorized under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 31502 to
prescribe requirements for, among other things, safety of operations of
equipment of motor carriers that operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136, the Secretary also has authority to prescribe
regulations to ensure that CMVs are maintained, equipped, loaded and
operated safely. And under 49 U.S.C. 31142 the Secretary must establish
standards for annual or more frequent inspections of CMVs. The
Secretary's authority to establish improved standards or methods to
ensure brakes and brake systems of CMVs are inspected by appropriate
employees and maintained properly is provided under 49 U.S.C. 31137(g).
    Motor carriers must maintain, or require maintenance of, records
documenting the inspection, repair and maintenance activities performed
on their owned and leased vehicles. There are no prescribed forms.
Electronic recordkeeping is allowed (see 49 CFR 390.31(d)). Documents
requiring a signature must be capable of replication (i.e., photocopy,
facsimile, etc.) in such form that will provide an opportunity for
signature verification upon demand. Also, if electronic recordkeeping
is used, all of the relevant data on the original documents must be
included in the electronic transmission for the records to be valid.
    The motor carrier industry has never questioned the need to keep
CMV maintenance records. In fact, most motor carriers would keep some
records

without any regulatory requirements to do so. Records of inspection,
repair, and maintenance; roadside inspection reports; driver vehicle
inspection reports; the documentation of periodic inspections; the
evidence of the qualifications of individuals performing periodic
inspections; and the evidence of brake inspectors' qualifications
contain the minimum amount of information necessary to document that a
motor carrier has established a system of inspection, repair, and
maintenance for its equipment which meets the standards in 49 CFR part
396.
    FMCSA and its representatives use these records to verify motor
carriers' compliance with the inspection, repair, and maintenance
standards in part 396. This ICR supports the Department of
Transportation's strategic goal of safety. The ICR also ensures that
motor carriers have adequate records to document the inspection,
repair, and maintenance of their CMVs, and to ensure that adequate
measures are taken to keep their CMVs in safe and proper operating
condition at all times. Compliance with the inspection, repair, and
maintenance regulations helps to reduce the likelihood of accidents
attributable, in whole or in part, to the mechanical condition of the
CMV.
    The Agency does not intend to revise the contents of this
information collection, the frequency of information collection, or how
it uses the information. Because the previous four updates to this
information collection were developed in conjunction with rulemaking
actions, only those sections of the information collection affected by
the specific rulemaking changes were amended during the previous four
updates and a comprehensive update of the information collection has
not been done since 2006. This renewal includes updated data regarding
the number of motor carriers subject to the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations, vehicle counts, inspections, and other underlying
data used to estimate the total burden hours. In addition, this
revision corrects the manner in which: (1) The burden associated with
routine inspection, repair and maintenance records is calculated, by
including non-powered CMVs in addition to power units; and (2) the
burden associated with periodic inspection records is calculated, by
using only the records associated with the once-per-year inspection
conducted in accordance with 49 CFR Chapter III, Subchapter B, Appendix
G. Finally, this revision corrects the calculation of the burden
associated with Driver-Vehicle Inspection Reports (DVIRs) by including
the 30 seconds required for motor carrier certification of corrective
action for defect DVIRs that was inadvertently omitted in the
calculation of this estimate in the December 2014 No-Defect DVIR rule.
    If the recordkeeping were required to be completed less frequently,
it would greatly hinder the ability of FMCSA and State officials and
representatives to ascertain that CMVs are satisfactorily maintained.
The timely documentation of CMV inspection, repair, and maintenance
enables FMCSA and State officials to evaluate the present state of a
motor carrier's CMV maintenance program and to check the current level
of regulatory compliance at any point in a carrier's maintenance
schedule or program.
    The FMCSA has identified periodic inspection standards of 22
States, the District of Columbia, the Alabama Liquefied Petroleum Gas
Board, 10 Canadian Provinces, and one Canadian Territory that are
comparable to, or as effective as, the Federal periodic inspection
requirements. The FMCSA does not require Federal periodic inspections
and the related recordkeeping for motor carriers that comply with these
equivalent periodic inspection programs. The FMCSA is not aware of any
other duplicative standards or recordkeeping requirements that apply to
motor carriers.
    The FMCSA does not employ this collection of information for
statistical use.
    Title: Inspection, Repair and Maintenance.
    OMB Control Number: 2126-0003.
    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved information
collection.
    Respondents: Motor carriers and commercial motor vehicle drivers.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 543,061 motor carriers and
5,739,712 drivers.
    Estimated Time per Response: Varies according to the requirements
for specific records.
    Expiration Date: July 31, 2018.
    Frequency of Response: Varies according to requirements for
specific records.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 13,791,001 hours [7,558,390 hours
for inspection, repair, and maintenance + 5,536,622 hours for driver
vehicle inspection reports + 194,586 hours for disposition of roadside
inspection reports + 469,414 hours for periodic inspections + 16,904
hours for records of inspector qualifications + 15,085 hours for
records of brake inspector qualifications].
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed
collection is necessary for the performance of FMCSA's functions; (2)
the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for FMCSA to enhance the
quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize or include your
comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

    Issued under the authority of 49 CFR 1.87 on: March 27, 2018.
Kelly Regal,
Associate Administrator for Office of Research and Information
Technology.
[FR Doc. 2018-06859 Filed 4-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P