[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 232 (Monday, December 5, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74314-74316]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26307]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[FRL-10381-01-R5]

Availability of Federally-Enforceable State Implementation Plans
for All States

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notification of availability.

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

SUMMARY: Section 110(h) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended in 1990,
requires EPA to assemble the requirements of the federally-enforceable
State Implementation Plans (SIPs) in each State and to provide
notification in the Federal Register of the availability of such
documents every three years. This document fulfills the three-year
requirement of making these SIP compilations for each State available
to the public. This document also addresses EPA's obligation under a
consent decree which required EPA to assemble and publish online the
SIP rules that have been approved by EPA as of August 31, 2022.

DATES: Effective December 5, 2022.

ADDRESSES: See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for specific
regional addresses and contacts.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christos Panos, EPA, Air and Radiation
Division (AR-18J), Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. How can I comment or obtain more information on plans where I live?

    You may contact the appropriate EPA Regional Office regarding the
requirements of the applicable implementation plans for each State in
that region. The list below identifies the appropriate regional office
for each state. The SIP compilations are available for public
inspection during normal business hours at the appropriate EPA Regional
Office. If you want to view these documents, you should make an
appointment with the appropriate EPA office and arrange to review the
SIP at a mutually agreeable time.
    Region 1: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode
Island, and Vermont.
    Regional Contact: Ariel Garcia (617/918-1660,
[email protected]), EPA, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 5 Post
Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912.
    See also: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/approved-air-quality-implementation-plans-region-1.
    Region 2: New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands.
    Regional Contact: Linda Longo (212/637-3565, [email protected]),
EPA, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, New York, NY 10007-1866.
    See also: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/approved-air-quality-implementation-plans-region-2.
    Region 3: Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania,
Virginia, and West Virginia.
    Regional Contact: Gregory Becoat (215/814-2036,
[email protected]), EPA, Office of Air and Radiation (3AD00), Four
Penn Center 1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103-2029.
    See also: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/approved-air-quality-implementation-plans-region-3.
    Region 4: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee.
    Regional Contact: Sarah LaRocca (404/562-8994,
[email protected]), EPA Region 4, Air Planning Branch, Air
Regulatory Management Section, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303-
3104.
    See also: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/approved-air-quality-implementation-plans-region-4.
    Region 5: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and
Wisconsin.
    Regional Contact: Christos Panos (312/353-8328,
[email protected]), EPA, Air and Radiation Division (AR-18J), 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604-3507.
    See also: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/approved-air-quality-implementation-plans-region-5.
    Region 6: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas.
    Regional Contacts: Karolina Ruan-Lei (214/665-7346, [email protected]), Adina Wiley (214/665-2115, [email protected])
and Bill Deese (214/665-7253, [email protected]), EPA, Air and
Radiation Division, State Planning and Implementation Branch (R6 AR-
SH), 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, TX 75270.
    See also: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/approved-air-quality-implementation-plans-region-6.
    Region 7: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska.
    Regional Contact: Sarah Watterson (913/551-7797,
[email protected]), EPA, Air and Radiation Division, Air Quality
& Planning Branch, 11201 Renner Blvd., Lenexa, KS 66219.
    See also: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/approved-air-quality-implementation-plans-region-7.
    Region 8: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and
Wyoming.
    Regional Contact: Aaron Zull<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]),
EPA, Air and Radiation Division, Air Quality Planning Branch, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202-1129.
    See also: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/approved-air-quality-implementation-plans-region-8.
    Region 9: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa,
Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
    Regional Contacts: Kevin Gong (415/972-3073, [email protected])
and Doris Lo (415/972-3959, [email protected]), EPA, Air and Radiation
Division, Rules Office, (AIR-3-2), 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
    See also: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/approved-air-quality-implementation-plans-region-9.
    Region 10: Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
    Regional Contact: Randall Ruddick (206/553-1999,
[email protected]), EPA Region 10, Air and Radiation Division
(15-H13), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101.
    See also: https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/approved-air-quality-implementation-plans-region-10.

II. What is the basis for this document?

    Section 110(h)(1) of the CAA mandates that not later than 5 years
after the date of enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990, and every
three years thereafter, the Administrator shall assemble and publish a
comprehensive document for each State setting forth all requirements of
the applicable implementation plan for such State and shall publish
notice in the Federal Register of the availability of such documents.
    Section 110(h) recognizes the fluidity of a given State SIP. The
SIP is a living document which can be revised by the State to address
its unique air pollution problems. The CAA requires EPA to take action
on any revisions to the SIP, including those containing new and or/
revised regulations. See CAA section 110(k). On May 31, 1972 (37 FR
10842), EPA approved, with certain exceptions, the initial SIPs for 50
states, four territories and the District of Columbia. [Note: EPA
approved an additional SIP--for the Northern Mariana Islands--on
November 10, 1986 (51 FR 40799)]. Since 1972, each State and territory
has submitted numerous SIP revisions, either on their own initiative,
or because they were required to under the CAA. This notice of
availability informs the public that the SIP compilation has been
updated to include the most recent requirements approved into the SIP.
These approved requirements are federally-enforceable.
    This document also addresses EPA's obligation under a consent
decree in Our Children's Earth Foundation v. Regan, No. 4:20-cv-08530-
YGR (N.D. Cal December 13, 2021), which established deadlines for EPA
to publish online, the regulations, ordinances, and statutes and source
specific permits or requirements approved by EPA and incorporated by
reference in the Code of Federal Regulations.

III. Background

A. Relationship of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to
SIPs

    EPA has established primary and secondary NAAQS for six criteria
pollutants, which are widespread common pollutants known to be harmful
to human health and welfare. The criteria pollutants are carbon
monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur
dioxide. See 40 CFR part 50 for a technical description of how the
levels of these standards are measured and attained. See also https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants. SIPs provide for implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS in each state. Areas within
each state that are designated nonattainment are subject to additional
planning and control requirements. Accordingly, different regulations
or programs in the SIP will apply to different areas. EPA lists the
designation of each area at 40 CFR part 81.

B. What is a SIP?

    The SIP is a plan for each State that provide for implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. The SIP also identifies how
that State will attain and/or maintain the primary and secondary NAAQS
set forth in section 109 of the CAA and 40 CFR 50.4 through 50.13 and
50.15 through 50.17 and which includes federally-enforceable
requirements. Each State is required to have a SIP which contains
control measures and strategies which demonstrate how each area will
attain and maintain the NAAQS. These plans are developed through a
public process, formally adopted by the State, and submitted by the
Governor's designee to EPA. The CAA requires EPA to review each plan
and any plan revisions and to approve the plan or plan revisions if
consistent with the CAA.
    SIP requirements applicable to all areas are provided in section
110. Part D of title I of the CAA specifies additional requirements
applicable to nonattainment areas. Section 110 and part D describe the
elements of a SIP and include, among other things, emission
inventories, a monitoring network, an air quality analysis, modeling,
attainment demonstrations, enforcement mechanisms, and regulations
which have been adopted by the State to attain or maintain NAAQS. EPA
has adopted regulatory requirements which spell out the procedures for
preparing, adopting and submitting SIPs and SIP revisions; these are
codified in 40 CFR part 51.
    EPA's action on each State's SIP is promulgated in 40 CFR part 52.
The first section in the subpart in 40 CFR part 52 for each State is
generally the ``Identification of plan'' section which provides
chronological development of the State SIP. Alternatively, if the state
has undergone the revised Incorporation by Reference formatting process
(see 62 FR 27968; May 22, 1997), the identification of plan section
identifies the State-submitted rules and plan elements that have been
federally approved. The goal of the State-by-State SIP compilation is
to identify those rules under the ``Identification of plan'' section
which are currently federally-enforceable. In addition, some of the SIP
compilations may include control strategies, such as transportation
control measures, local ordinances, State statutes, and emission
inventories. Some of the SIP compilations may not identify these other
federally-enforceable elements.
    The contents of a typical SIP fall into three categories: (1)
State-adopted control measures which consists of either rules/
regulations or source-specific requirements (e.g., orders and consent
decrees); (2) State-submitted ``non-regulatory'' components (e.g.,
attainment plans, rate of progress plans, emission inventories,
transportation control measures, statutes demonstrating legal
authority, monitoring networks, etc.); and (3) additional requirements
promulgated by EPA (in the absence of a commensurate State provision)
to satisfy a mandatory section 110 or part D (CAA) requirement.

C. What does it mean to be federally-enforceable?

    Enforcement of the state regulation before and after it is
incorporated into the federally-approved SIP is primarily a state
responsibility. However, after the regulation is federally approved,
EPA is authorized to take enforcement action against violators.
Citizens also have legal recourse to address violations as described in
section 304 of the CAA.
    When States submit their most current State regulations for
inclusion into federally-enforceable SIPs, EPA begins its review as
soon as possible. Until EPA approves a submittal by rulemaking action,
State-submitted regulations will be State-enforceable only. Therefore,
State-enforceable SIPs may exist that differ from federally-enforceable
SIPs. As EPA approves these State-submitted regulations, the regional
offices will continue to update the SIP compilations to include these
applicable requirements.

IV. What are the documents and materials associated with the SIP?

    In addition to state regulations that provide for air pollution
control, SIPs include EPA-approved non-regulatory elements (such as
transportation control measures, local ordinances, state statutes,
modeling demonstrations, and emission inventories). Both the state
regulations and non-regulatory elements must have gone through the
state rulemaking process with the opportunity for public comment. After
these SIPs had been fully adopted by the State and submitted to EPA,
EPA took rulemaking action on SIPs, and those which have been EPA-
approved or conditionally approved are listed along with any
limitations on their approval. Examples of EPA-approved documents and
materials associated with the SIP include, but are not limited to: SIP
Narratives; Particulate Matter Plans; Carbon Monoxide Plans; Ozone
Plans; Maintenance plans; Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M)
SIPs; Emissions Inventories; Monitoring Networks; State Statutes
submitted for the purposes of demonstrating legal authority; Part D
nonattainment area plans; Attainment demonstrations; Transportation
control measures (TCMs); Committal measures; Contingency Measures; Non-
regulatory and Non-TCM Control Measures; 15% Rate of Progress Plans;
Emergency episode plans; and Visibility plans. As stated above, the
``non-regulatory'' documents are available for public inspection at the
appropriate EPA Regional Office.

V. What is being made available under this document?

    This document announces that the federally-enforceable SIP for each
State is available for review and public inspection at the appropriate
EPA regional office and identifies the contact person for each regional
office.
    The federally-enforceable SIP contains both regulatory requirements
and non-regulatory items such as plans and emission inventories.
Regulatory requirements include State-adopted rules and regulations,
source-specific requirements reflected in consent orders, and in some
cases, provisions in the enabling statutes.
    Following the 1990 CAA Amendments, the first section 110(h) SIP
compilation availability notice was published on November 1, 1995 (61
FR 55459). At that time, EPA announced that the SIP compilations,
comprised of the regulatory portion of each State SIP, were available
at the EPA Regional Office serving that particular State. In general,
the compilations made available in 1995 did not include the source-
specific requirements or other documents and materials associated with
the SIP. With the second notice of availability in 1998, the source-
specific requirements and the ``non-regulatory'' documents [e.g.,
attainment plans, rate of progress plans, emission inventories,
transportation control measures, statutes demonstrating legal
authority, monitoring networks, etc.] were made available for the first
time. These documents will remain available for public inspection at
the respective regional office listed in the ADDRESSES section above.
If you want to view these documents, please contact the appropriate EPA
Regional Office and arrange for a mutually agreeable time.

Michael Regan,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022-26307 Filed 12-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 239 (Monday, December 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77408-77414]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31340]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA- 2015-0338]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
Mellitus

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 45 individuals
for exemption from the prohibition against persons with insulin-treated
diabetes mellitus (ITDM) operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in
interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable these
individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 13, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0338 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket numbers for this notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://

www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140 on the ground level of
the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
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: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for a 2-year period
if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety
that is equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved
absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the Agency to renew
exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The 45 individuals listed
in this notice have recently requested such an exemption from the
diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), which applies to drivers
of CMVs in interstate commerce. Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate
the qualifications of each applicant to determine whether granting the
exemption will achieve the required level of safety mandated by
statute.

II. Qualifications of Applicants

Shannon M. Anfindsen

    Ms. Anfindsen, 22, has had ITDM since 1997. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2015 and certified that she has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Anfindsen understands diabetes
management and monitoring has stable control of her diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Anfindsen meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
optometrist examined her in 2015 and certified that she does not have
diabetic retinopathy. She holds an operator's license from Georgia.

Jessie L. Arrant, Jr.

    Mr. Arrant, 54, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Arrant understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Arrant meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from
Georgia.

Joseph M. Benech

    Mr. Benech, 54, has had ITDM since 2011. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Benech understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Benech meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Rhode Island.

Mark L. Birch

    Mr. Birch, 45, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Birch understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Birch meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Wisconsin.

Shane M. Burgard

    Mr. Burgard, 41, has had ITDM since 1989. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Burgard understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Burgard meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from Minnesota.

 Jonathan W. Cottom

    Mr. Cottom, 43, has had ITDM since 1978. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Cottom understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Cottom meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he stable
proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from
Pennsylvania.

David J. Davenport

    Mr. Davenport, 64, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Davenport understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Davenport meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Washington.

Wesley O. Davis

    Mr. Davis, 61, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Davis understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Davis meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
South Carolina.

Steven P. DelPizzo

    Mr. DelPizzo, 35, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. DelPizzo understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. DelPizzo meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Pennsylvania.

Savering F. Demiter

    Mr. Demiter, 62, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Demiter understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Demiter meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Brandon A. Dipasquale

    Mr. Dipasquale, 22, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Dipasquale understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Dipasquale meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from New York.

Gregory P. Doyle

    Mr. Doyle, 58, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Doyle understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Doyle meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Colorado.

Scott A. Fetner

    Mr. Fetner, 47, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Fetner understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Fetner meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from Alabama.

Alfredo Flores

    Mr. Flores, 50, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Flores understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Flores meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Kansas.

Timothy D. Funk

    Mr. Funk, 55, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Funk understands

diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes
using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Funk meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Illinois.

James D. Gage

    Mr. Gage, 48, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Gage understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gage meets the requirements of the
vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him
in 2015 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds a chauffeur's license from Michigan.

Leslie G. Goodwin

    Mr. Goodwin, 77, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Goodwin understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Goodwin meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Kansas.

Diane M. Greenberg

    Ms. Greenberg, 55, has had ITDM since 2014. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2015 and certified that she has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Greenberg understands diabetes
management and monitoring has stable control of her diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Greenberg meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
optometrist examined her in 2015 and certified that she does not have
diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from Virginia.

Brent P. Griswold

    Mr. Griswold, 27, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Griswold understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Griswold meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.

Earl E. Hudson, III

    Mr. Hudson, 47, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hudson understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hudson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from South Carolina.

Gregory A. Huffman

    Mr. Huffman, 43, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Huffman understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Huffman meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Texas.

Donald R. Kuehn

    Mr. Kuehn, 60, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Kuehn understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kuehn meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.

Robert D. Lair, Jr.

    Mr. Lair, 52, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Lair understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Lair meets the requirements of the
vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined
him in 2015 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic
retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Arkansas.

Mark A. Leman

    Mr. Leman, 49, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function

that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2
or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Leman understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Leman meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.

Terry D. Leuthold

    Mr. Leuthold, 57, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Leuthold understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Leuthold meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Montana.

Michael S. Massa

    Mr. Massa, 49, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Massa understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Massa meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Jordan L. Moss

    Mr. Moss, 26, has had ITDM since 2001. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Moss understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Moss meets the requirements of the
vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him
in 2015 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds an operator's license from Georgia.

Ted A. Moyer

    Mr. Moyer, 40, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Moyer understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Moyer meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Florida.

Lynette A. Occhipinti

    Ms. Occhipinti, 52, has had ITDM since 2013. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2015 and certified that she has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Occhipinti understands diabetes
management and monitoring has stable control of her diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Occhipinti meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
optometrist examined her in 2015 and certified that she does not have
diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from Washington.

Derek D. Patrick

    Mr. Patrick, 55, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Patrick understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Patrick meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a CDL from Michigan.

Joseph M. Petrucci

    Mr. Petrucci, 73, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Petrucci understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Petrucci meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from New Hampshire.

James W. Prather

    Mr. Prather, 61, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Prather understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Prather meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from
Ohio.

Edward O. Prosser

    Mr. Prosser, 53, has had ITDM since 2002. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Prosser understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Prosser meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Rhode Island.

Dennis L. Ruff

    Mr. Ruff, 67, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Ruff understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Ruff meets the requirements of the
vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him
in 2015 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He
holds an operator's license from Washington.

William J. Shrader

    Mr. Shrader, 51, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Shrader understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Shrader meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from California.

Ronald L. Smith

    Mr. Smith, 58, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Smith understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smith meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Kansas.

Wayne D. Smith

    Mr. Smith, 67, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Smith understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smith meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Vermont.

Carnnell A. Taite

    Mr. Taite, 64, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Taite understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Taite meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Michigan.

Garrett J. Tousignant

    Mr. Tousignant, 47, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Tousignant understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Tousignant meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Illinois.

Franklin G. Towell

    Mr. Towell, 79, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Towell understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Towell meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana.

Robert S. Townsend

    Mr. Townsend, 71, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Townsend understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Townsend meets the

requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Hampshire.

Zachary C. Warrick

    Mr. Warrick, 35, has had ITDM since 1987. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Warrick understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Warrick meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Nebraska.

Zachary C. White

    Mr. White, 30, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. White understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. White meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from California.

Mark K. Wittig

    Mr. Wittig, 58, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Wittig understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wittig meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.

III. Request for Comments

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

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

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

IV. Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket number FMCSA-2015-0338 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.

V. 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-2015-0338 and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket
Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments related to the
proposed rulemaking.

    Issued on: December 2, 2015.
 Larry W. Minor,
 Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-31340 Filed 12-11-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


     UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

                             OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFTEY
AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

RE:  	Meeting with BASF, Eastman Chemical Company (Eastman) and EPA to discuss conditions of use for phthalates and phthalic anhydride

List of Documents
 Meeting Summary
 Attendees
Meeting Summary
On November 21, 2019, EPA spoke with BASF and Eastman to discuss use information on phthalates and phthalic anhydride. EPA provided a general overview of the prioritization and the risk evaluation process under TSCA section 6. BASF and Eastman provided their knowledge and expertise about numerous phthalates and discussed specific phthalate uses, properties, replacements, and movement within the market among other things.

Attendees
EPA:
Alex Smith
Bethany Masten
Claire Brisse
Darlene Leonard
Doug Parsons
Eliane Catilina
Eva Cappuccilli
Jordan Garbin
Lea Carmichael
Marc Edmonds
Peter Gimlin
Sarah Cox
Susan Makris
Victoria Ellenbogen

BASF:
Steven Goldberg
Patrick Harmon

Eastman:
Scott Boito


Comparison of VOC emissions impact from addition of PV-Vent requirement to addition of exemption for salvage yard operators

Data and Assumptions for PV-Vent Calculation:

1.  The PV-Vent requirement will affect approximately 390 facilities not currently required to have such devices.  (Source: Background Document for Proposed Revisions to 310 CMR 7.24(6), Dispensing of Motor Vehicle Fuel (The Stage II Vapor Recovery Program); pg. 6).

2.  The average gasoline throughput at these facilities is 500,000 gallons / yr.  (Source: pg. 7 of the reference cited in assumption 1.)

3.  PV-vents reduce emissions by 90%.  (Source: July 19, 2000 letter from Region 1 to CT-DEP)

4.  Breathing losses (VOC emissions) from tanks without PV vents = 1 lb VOC per 1,000 gallons of throughput.  (Source: EPA's AP 42, Table 5.2-7)

Calculation:

(390 stations add PV-Vents) * (500,000 gallons / station) = 195,000,000 gallons of gas newly subject to this requirement.

195,000,000 gallons * 1 lb VOC / 1,000 gallons of throughput =  195,000 lbs of uncontrolled VOC emissions.

195,000 lbs uncontrolled emissions * 0.9 (90% control efficiency) = 175,500 lbs VOC controlled (87.7 tons / yr emission reduction). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Data and Assumptions for salvage yard calculation:

1.  Number of registered motor vehicles in Massachusetts = 5,333,915.  (Source: US DOT; Federal Highway Administration; Highway Statistics Series; State Motor Vehicle Registrations  -  2010; Table MV-1; December, 2011).

2.  National average vehicle scrappage rate = 4.3%.  (Source: National Automobile Dealers Association; State of the Industry Report, 2011, pg. 16)

3.  5 gallons of gas recovered per scrapped vehicle (my assumption)

4.  Uncontrolled filling of storage tank: 11.5 lbs VOC / 1,000 gallons (Source: Table 5.27 of AP-42)

5.  Uncontrolled vehicle refueling: 11.0 lbs VOC / 1,000 gallons (Source: Table 5.27 of AP-42)

6.  Breathing loss (VOC emissions) from tanks without PV vents = 1 lb VOC per 1,000 gallons of throughput.  (Source: EPA's AP 42, Table 5.2-7)

Calculation:

(5,333,915 MA vehicles) * (0.043 scrappage rate) = 229,358 vehicles scrapped

(229,358 vehicles scrapped) * (5 gallons gas/vehicle) = 1,146,790 gallons of gas recovered at scrap yards.

(1,146,790 gallons gas) * (23.5 lbs VOC / 1,000 gallons (combined emission rate)) = 26,950 lbs VOC emitted (13.5 tons/year)

Comparison:  the PV vent requirement being added to the Massachusetts Stage 2 regulation will reduce VOC emissions by approximately 88 tons per year, whereas exempting salvage yards will increase VOC emissions by approximately 14 tons/year.


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 37 (Monday, February 25, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 5968]
[FR Doc No: C1-2019-00460]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 141 and 385

[Docket No. RM19-12-000]

Revisions to the Filing Process for Commission Forms

Correction

    In proposed rule document 2019-00460 beginning on page 1412 in the
issue of Monday, February 4, 2019, make the following correction:
    On page 1416, in the second column, the last line of text should
read as follows:

    `` [ballot] 100 hours to prepare and submit the first filing using
XBRL; and''.

[FR Doc. C1-2019-00460 Filed 2-22-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 1301-00-D


 Scenario 1 Multiple bulk above ground storage tanks directly supplying fuel to the hydrant piping, which fuels the aircraft.    * Proposed definition does not regulate any part of this system UNLESS 10% or more of the volume of the "airport hydrant fuel distribution system" is below ground.      * The "system" comprises of the group of storage tanks directly connected to the hydrant piping.  Under this scenario, the group of tanks is the bulk ASTs.

Scenario 2 Multiple bulk above ground storage tanks that directly supplies fuel to a group of intermediary underground storage tanks, which directly feeds the hydrant piping to fuel the aircraft.    * Proposed definition defines the "airport hydrant fuel distribution system" as the group of storage tanks directly connected to the hydrant piping and the hydrant piping.  Under this scenario, the group of tanks is the USTs.    * The bulk ASTs are not considered to be part of the "airport hydrant fuel distribution system" under this scenario.

Scenario 3 Multiple bulk above ground storage tanks that directly supply fuel to an intermediary underground storage tank, which directly feeds the hydrant piping to fuel the aircraft.    * Proposed definition defines the "airport hydrant fuel distribution system" as the group of storage tanks directly connected to the hydrant piping and the hydrant piping.  Under this scenario, the group of tanks is the single UST.    * The bulk ASTs are not considered to be part of the "airport hydrant fuel distribution system" under this scenario.

Scenario 4 Bulk underground storage tank feeds multiple intermediary USTs, which directly feeds the hydrant piping system.    * Proposed definition defines the "airport hydrant fuel distribution system" as the group of storage tanks directly connected to the hydrant piping and the hydrant piping.  Under this scenario, the group of tanks is the smaller USTs that directly feed the hydrant piping.    * The bulk UST is not considered to be part of the "airport hydrant fuel distribution system" under this scenario.  However, the bulk UST would be regulated as a field constructed underground storage tank or as a traditional UST.

Scenario 5 This scenario contains two distinct "airport hydrant fuel distribution systems" and a bulk above ground storage tank farm.    * Each set of storage tanks directly connected to hydrant piping that fuels aircraft is a distinct "airport hydrant fuel distribution system."    * The ASTs in the tank farm are not regulated by the proposed definition.    * The proposed definition regulates the intermediary UST directly connected to an airport hydrant piping run and this hydrant piping run.    * The proposed definition regulates the intermediary ASTs and the hydrant piping run that they are directly connected to ONLY if 10% or more of the volume of these ASTs and this hydrant piping run are below the ground.


[Federal Register: June 30, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 126)]
[Notices]
[Page 36884]
[DOCID:fr30jn08-91]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1770-DR]

Nebraska; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Nebraska (FEMA-1770-DR), dated June 20, 2008,
and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: June 20, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated June 20, 2008, the President declared a major disaster under the
authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Nebraska resulting from severe storms, tornadoes, and flooding
beginning on May 22, 2008, and continuing, is of sufficient severity
and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42
U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act). Therefore, I declare that such
a major disaster exists in the State of Nebraska.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance and Public
Assistance in the designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout
the State. Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance
be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act
for Hazard Mitigation and Other Needs Assistance will be limited to
75 percent of the total eligible costs. Federal funds provided under
the Stafford Act for Public Assistance also will be limited to 75
percent of the total eligible costs, except for any particular
projects that are eligible for a higher Federal cost-sharing
percentage under the FEMA Public Assistance Pilot Program instituted
pursuant to 6 U.S.C. 777.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section
310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public
Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed
six months after the date of this declaration.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Willie G. Nunn, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this declared disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Nebraska have been designated
as adversely affected by this declared major disaster:

    Buffalo, Butler, Colfax, Dawson, Douglas, Gage, Hamilton,
Jefferson, Kearney, Platte, Richardson, Sarpy, and Saunders Counties
for Individual Assistance.
    Adams, Blaine, Boone, Boyd, Brown, Buffalo, Burt, Butler, Cass,
Chase, Colfax, Cuming, Custer, Dawson, Douglas, Fillmore, Frontier,
Furnas, Gage, Garfield, Gosper, Hall, Hamilton, Hayes, Holt, Howard,
Jefferson, Keya Paha, Lancaster, Lincoln, Logan, Loup, Merrick,
McPherson, Nance, Otoe, Phelps, Platte, Polk, Red Willow,
Richardson, Rock, Saline, Saunders, Sarpy, Seward, Sherman, Stanton,
Thayer, Thomas, Thurston, Webster, and York Counties for Public
Assistance.
    All counties within the State of Nebraska are eligible to apply
for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidential Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidential Declared
Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and
Households; 97.050, Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance to
Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--
Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039,
Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-14730 Filed 6-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P


[Federal Register: January 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 15)]
[Notices]
[Page 3185-3186]
[DOCID:fr24ja07-95]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55114; File No. SR-Phlx-2006-81]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Order Granting Approval to Proposed Rule Change Relating to the
Establishment of a Maximum Number of Quoting Participants Permitted in
a Particular Option on the Exchange

January 17, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On December 5, 2006, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.
(``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''), \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend Phlx Rule 507, which
governs the assignment of options to Streaming Quote Traders (``SQTs'')
\3\ and Remote Streaming Quote Traders (``RSQRs''),\4\ by adding
commentary to the rule establishing a maximum number of quoting
participants that may be assigned to a particular equity option at any
one time. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on December 18, 2006.\5\ The Commission received no
comments regarding the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Phlx Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A).
    \4\ See Phlx Rule 1014(b)(ii)(B).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54914 (December 11,
2006), 71 FR 75798.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to enable the Exchange
to manage its quotation traffic and bandwidth capacity by limiting the
number of streaming quote market participants that may be assigned to a
particular option at a given point in time. The proposed amendments to
Phlx Rule 507 would establish: (i) A maximum number of quoters
(``MNQ'') in equity options based on each option's monthly trading
volume; (ii) a process for recalculating the MNQ based upon changes in
an option's monthly trading volume; (iii) an increase to the MNQ due to
exceptional circumstances; (iv) the process by which the Exchange will
notify market participants of changes to the MNQ; and (v) additional
criteria relating to the process by which the Exchange will assign SQT
and/or RSQT applicants in options in the event that there are more
applicants for assignment in a particular option than there are
positions.
    The Exchange proposes to limit the number of participants that may
be assigned to a particular equity option at any one time based upon
each option's monthly national volume. Proposed Commentary .02 to Phlx
Rule 507 sets forth tiered MNQ levels providing for 20 participants for
the top 5% most actively traded options; 15 participants for next 10%
most actively traded options, and 10 market participants for all other
options.\6\ The ranking is based upon the preceding month's national
volumes. The MNQ would be recalculated within the first five days of
each month based on the previous month's trading volume (``new MNQ'').
The Exchange would inform market participants of changes to the MNQ via
Exchange circular.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange may increase the MNQ levels by submitting to
the Commission a rule filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act and may decrease the MNQ levels upon Commission approval of a
rule filing submitted pursuant to 19(b)(2) of the Act. See proposed
Commentary .05 to Phlx Rule 507.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's Options Allocation, Evaluation and Securities
Committee (``OAESC'') \7\ would be able to increase the MNQ in
exceptional circumstances. Proposed Commentary .04 to Phlx Rule 507
describes the events that may be considered ``exceptional,'' including
substantial trading volume (whether actual or expected), a major news
event, or corporate event. The Exchange would also be permitted to
reduce the MNQ following the cessation of the exceptional
circumstances, but would be required to follow the same procedures
applicable for decreases to the MNQ due to a change in volume.\8\ When
relying on this provision, the Exchange would submit a rule filing to
the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Phlx By-Law Article X, Section 10-7. The OAESC has
jurisdiction over, among other things: The appointment of
specialists on the options and foreign currency options trading
floors; allocation, retention and transfer of privileges to deal in
options on the trading floors; and administration of the 500 series
of Phlx rules.
    \8\ See proposed Commentary .03 to Phlx Rule 507.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is also proposing to amend Phlx Rule 507 by adding
criteria for the OAESC to consider when determining whether to assign
an option to a member in the situation where there are more applicants
for assignment in a particular option than there are positions
available. Specifically, proposed paragraph (b)(iii) of Phlx Rule 507
would require the OAESC to consider: (i) The financial and technical
resources available to the applicant; (ii)

the applicant's experience and expertise in market making or options
trading; and (iii) the applicant's prior performance as a specialist,
SQT or RSQT, based on evaluations conducted pursuant to Phlx Rule 510,
which includes quantified measures of performance.
    Finally, the Exchange represents that members assigned in a
particular option as of the date of Commission approval of this
proposed rule change will be guaranteed a position as a quoting
participant in the particular option.

III. Discussion

    After careful review of the proposal, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\10\ In particular, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of an exchange be designed
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the Exchange's proposal, to establish
a maximum number of quoting participants that may be assigned to a
particular equity option at any one time based on the trading volume of
that option should enhance the Exchange's ability to manage its
quotation traffic and bandwidth capacity.
    The Commission further believes that, in the event that there are
more applicants for assignment in a particular option than there are
available positions, the financial and technical capacity of SQTs and
RSQTs, as well as prior performance, are appropriate factors to
consider and should assist the OAESC in allocating the option on an
equitable basis to the benefit of the Exchange and the public.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\12\ that the proposed rule change (SR-Phlx-2006-81), be, and
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-957 Filed 1-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 235 (Thursday, December 6, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72746-72747]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29512]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0223; FRL- 9758-8]

Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Modifications to
Renewable Fuel Standard and Diesel Sulfur Programs

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA published a direct final rule on October 9, 2012 to amend
the definition of heating oil in 40 CFR 80.1401 in the Renewable Fuel
Standard (``RFS'') program under section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act.
The direct final rule also amended requirements under EPA's diesel
sulfur program related to the sulfur content of locomotive and marine
diesel fuel produced by transmix processors, and the fuel marker
requirements for 500 ppm sulfur locomotive and marine (LM) diesel fuel
to allow for solvent yellow 124 marker to transition out of the
distribution system. Because EPA received adverse comments on the
heating oil definition and transmix amendments, we are withdrawing
those portions of the direct final rule. Because EPA did not receive
adverse comments with respect to the yellow marker amendments, those
amendments will become effective as indicated in the direct final rule.

DATES: Effective December 6, 2012, EPA withdraws the amendments to 40
CFR 80.511, 80.513, 80.572, 80.597, 80.1401, 80.1450, 80.1451, 80.1453,
80.1454, and 80.1460 published at 77 FR 61281 (October 9, 2012).
Because EPA did not receive adverse comments with respect to the
amendments to 40 CFR 80.510, 80.598, 80.610, and 80.1426, those
amendments will become effective on December 10, 2012, as indicated in
the direct final rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristien Knapp, Office of
Transportation and Air Quality, Mail Code: 6405J, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., 20460; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA published a direct final rule on October
9, 2012 (77 FR 61281) to amend provisions in the renewable fuel
standard (RFS) and diesel sulfur fuel programs. The RFS amendment would
have changed the definition of home heating oil. The diesel sulfur
amendments would have provided

additional flexibility for transmix processors who produce locomotive
and marine diesel fuel, and allowed solvent yellow 124 marker to
transition out of the distribution system. We stated in the direct
final rule that if EPA received timely adverse comment or a hearing
request on the rule or any specific portion of the rule, we would
publish a withdrawal of the rule or a specific portion of the rule in
the Federal Register informing the public that the rule or portions of
the rule with adverse comment will not take effect. We subsequently
received adverse comment on the RFS heating oil amendments and the
diesel transmix amendments. We did not receive adverse comment on the
yellow marker amendments to 40 CFR 80.510, 80.598, 80.610, or the RFS
requirement for RIN generation, as amended in 40 CFR 80.1426.
Therefore, EPA is withdrawing the direct final rule with respect to the
RFS heating oil amendments and the diesel sulfur transmix amendments,
but leaving in place the direct final rule with respect to 40 CFR
80.510, 80.598, 80.610, and 80.1426. Those regulatory amendments will
take effect on December 10, 2012.
    EPA intends to address all comments received on the RFS heating oil
and diesel transmix amendments in subsequent final actions, which will
be based on the parallel proposed rule also published on October 9,
2012 (77 FR 61313). As stated in the direct final rule and the parallel
proposed rule, we will not institute a second comment period on this
action.

    Dated: November 30, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.

    Accordingly, the regulatory amendments to 40 CFR 80.511, 80.513,
80.572, 80.597, 80.1401, 80.1450, 80.1451, 80.1453, 80.1454, and
80.1460 published on October 9, 2012 (77 FR 61281) are withdrawn. The
regulatory amendments to 40 CFR 80.510, 80.598, 80.610, and 80.1426
will take effect on December 10, 2012.

[FR Doc. 2012-29512 Filed 12-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P