Federal Register Vol. 83, No.103,
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 103 (May 29, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 103 (May 29, 2018)
| Page Range | 24397-24649 | |
| FR Document |
Document Created: 2017-12-29 23:38:22
Document Modified: 2017-12-29 23:38:22
| Page and Subject | |
|---|---|
| 83 FR 24550 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Commercial Space Transportation Licensing Regulations | |
| 83 FR 24548 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: FAA Entry Point Filing Form-International Registry | |
| 83 FR 24515 - Sunshine Act Meetings | |
| 83 FR 24473 - Sunshine Act Meetings | |
| 83 FR 24533 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fee Schedule on the BOX Market LLC (“BOX”) Options Facility To Amend Drop Copy Port Fees | |
| 83 FR 24441 - Safety Zone; City of North Charleston Fireworks, North Charleston, SC | |
| 83 FR 24475 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Correction | |
| 83 FR 24551 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: License Requirements for Operation of a Launch Site | |
| 83 FR 24549 - Agency Request for Emergency Approval of an Information Collection | |
| 83 FR 24549 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, Rebuilding, and Alteration | |
| 83 FR 24548 - SJI Board of Directors Meeting, Notice | |
| 83 FR 24438 - Policy on the Temporary Closure of Airports for Nonaeronautical Purposes | |
| 83 FR 24481 - Solicitation of Nominations for Membership to Serve on the Advisory Committee on Infant Mortality | |
| 83 FR 24481 - Advisory Committee on Interdisciplinary, Community-Based Linkages | |
| 83 FR 24406 - Safety Zone, Coast Guard Exercise Area, Hood Canal, Washington | |
| 83 FR 24501 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Pre-Apprenticeship-Pathways to Success | |
| 83 FR 24495 - Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) 2018 Lower Living Standard Income Level (LLSIL) | |
| 83 FR 24510 - Standard Format and Content of Physical Security Plans, Training and Qualifications Plans, and Safeguards Contingency Plans for Nuclear Power Plants | |
| 83 FR 24511 - Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.; Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4 Main Control Room Emergency Habitability System Changes | |
| 83 FR 24470 - Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petitions for Objection to State Operating Permit for ExxonMobil Corporation, ExxonMobil Baytown Refinery, Harris County, Texas | |
| 83 FR 24543 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees Related to Complex Orders | |
| 83 FR 24536 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Notice of No Objection To Advance Notice Filing Concerning The Options Clearing Corporation's Margin Methodology | |
| 83 FR 24490 - Public Land Order No. 7865; Partial Revocation of Turn Point Lighthouse Reservation; Washington | |
| 83 FR 24488 - Notice of Realty Action: Proposed Mesquite, Nevada Airport Lease Renewal/Amendment | |
| 83 FR 24489 - Notice of Realty Action: Non-Competitive (Direct Sale) and Conveyance of Public Land and Mineral Interests of Public Land in Maricopa and Pinal Counties, Arizona | |
| 83 FR 24472 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Group I Polymers and Resins (Renewal) | |
| 83 FR 24472 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Pharmaceuticals Production (Renewal) | |
| 83 FR 24471 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; EPA's Light-Duty In-Use Vehicle and Engine Testing Program (Renewal) | |
| 83 FR 24475 - Relocation Allowances: Taxes on Travel, Transportation, and Relocation Expenses | |
| 83 FR 24551 - Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in California | |
| 83 FR 24474 - Federal Travel Regulation (FTR); Relocation Allowances-Relocation Income Tax (RIT) Allowance Tables | |
| 83 FR 24571 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision | |
| 83 FR 24461 - U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting | |
| 83 FR 24584 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and Seizure Disorders | |
| 83 FR 24458 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request | |
| 83 FR 24547 - Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Under OMB Review | |
| 83 FR 24594 - Advisory Committee Charter Renewals | |
| 83 FR 24552 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Hearing | |
| 83 FR 24492 - Jopindar P. Harika, M.D.; Order | |
| 83 FR 24495 - 191st Meeting of the Advisory Council on Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans; Notice of Meeting | |
| 83 FR 24581 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes | |
| 83 FR 24574 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes Mellitus | |
| 83 FR 24591 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Information Collection Renewal; Submission for OMB Review; International Regulation | |
| 83 FR 24563 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes Mellitus | |
| 83 FR 24554 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision | |
| 83 FR 24464 - Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee | |
| 83 FR 24479 - Registration of Food Facilities: What You Need To Know About the Food and Drug Administration Regulation; Small Entity Compliance Guide; Availability | |
| 83 FR 24467 - 2021 Resource Pool, Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program-Eastern Division | |
| 83 FR 24568 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision | |
| 83 FR 24433 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 24427 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 24514 - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Notice of Meeting | |
| 83 FR 24555 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes Mellitus | |
| 83 FR 24576 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes Mellitus | |
| 83 FR 24572 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes | |
| 83 FR 24587 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision | |
| 83 FR 24585 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision | |
| 83 FR 24589 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision | |
| 83 FR 24485 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Crew's Effects Declaration | |
| 83 FR 24484 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Guarantee of Payment | |
| 83 FR 24462 - Electricity Advisory Committee | |
| 83 FR 24463 - Electricity Advisory Committee | |
| 83 FR 24462 - Notice of Orders Issued Under Section 3 of The Natural Gas Act During April 2018 | |
| 83 FR 24476 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations | |
| 83 FR 24475 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations | |
| 83 FR 24478 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations | |
| 83 FR 24457 - Information Collection Activity; Comment Request | |
| 83 FR 24405 - Use of Force by Personnel Engaged in Law Enforcement and Security Duties | |
| 83 FR 24405 - Motor Vehicle Traffic Supervision (Specific Installations) | |
| 83 FR 24517 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, in Connection With a Proposed Transaction Involving CHX Holdings, Inc. and the Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. | |
| 83 FR 24517 - President's Commission on White House Fellowships Advisory Committee: Closed Meeting | |
| 83 FR 24461 - New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting | |
| 83 FR 24491 - Steel Propane Cylinders From China, Taiwan, and Thailand; Institution of Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations and Scheduling of Preliminary Phase Investigations | |
| 83 FR 24593 - Proposed Extension of Information Collection Request Submitted for Public Comment; Form 8508, Request for Waiver From Filing Information Returns Electronically | |
| 83 FR 24593 - Proposed Extension of Information Collection Request Submitted for Public Comment; Section 103-Remedial Payment Closing Agreement Program | |
| 83 FR 24592 - Proposed Extension of Information Collection Request Submitted for Public Comment; Repayment of a Buyout Prior to Re-employment With the Federal Government | |
| 83 FR 24457 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request | |
| 83 FR 24460 - Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting | |
| 83 FR 24467 - Louisiana Public Service Commission v. System Energy Resources, Inc.; Entergy Services, Inc.; Notice of Complaint | |
| 83 FR 24465 - St. Joseph Energy Center, LLC; Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund Effective Date | |
| 83 FR 24467 - Combined Notice of Filings | |
| 83 FR 24465 - Combined Notice of Filings #1 | |
| 83 FR 24486 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Revision of a Currently Approved Collection: Request for Certification of Military or Naval Service | |
| 83 FR 24494 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension With Change, of a Previously Approved Collection; COPS Office Progress Report | |
| 83 FR 24514 - FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1 | |
| 83 FR 24513 - Instructions for Recording and Reporting Occupational Radiation Dose Data | |
| 83 FR 24405 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Harlem River, Bronx, New York | |
| 83 FR 24443 - Safety Zone; Willamette River, Lake Oswego, OR | |
| 83 FR 24487 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Enhancement of Survival Permit Application; Centennial Valley Arctic Grayling Candidate Conservation Agreement With Assurances, and Draft Environmental Assessment | |
| 83 FR 24445 - Periodic Reporting | |
| 83 FR 24534 - DMS ETF Trust I, et al. | |
| 83 FR 24548 - Twenty Ninth RTCA SC-222 AMS(R)S Systems Plenary | |
| 83 FR 24459 - U.S. Travel and Tourism Advisory Board | |
| 83 FR 24482 - National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program; List of Petitions Received | |
| 83 FR 24494 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Air Act | |
| 83 FR 24541 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Listing and Trading of the iShares Gold Strategy ETF, a Series of the iShares U.S. ETF Trust | |
| 83 FR 24473 - Filing Dates for the Pennsylvania Special Election in the 7th Congressional District | |
| 83 FR 24484 - Information Collection Request to Office of Management and Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0060 | |
| 83 FR 24446 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Attainment Demonstration for the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Ozone Nonattainment Area | |
| 83 FR 24516 - Submission for OMB Review; Comments Request | |
| 83 FR 24415 - Removal of International Entrepreneur Parole Program | |
| 83 FR 24436 - Proposed Amendment of V-97 and V-422 in the Vicinity of Chicago, IL | |
| 83 FR 24403 - Modification of Air Traffic Service (ATS) Routes in the Vicinity of Richmond, IN | |
| 83 FR 24406 - Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Nonattainment Plans for the Lemont and Pekin SO2 | |
| 83 FR 24408 - Ocean Disposal; Temporary Modification of an Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site in Massachusetts Bay | |
| 83 FR 24399 - Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Formerly Known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 24598 - 2018-2019 Refuge-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations | |
| 83 FR 24397 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes | |
| 83 FR 24505 - Secretary's Order 03-2018-Delegation of Authorities and Assignment of Responsibilities to the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management | |
| 83 FR 24502 - Secretary's Order 02-2018-Authority and Responsibilities for Implementation of the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 and Related Legislation |
Issue
Rural Utilities Service
International Trade Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Air Force Department
Army Department
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Western Area Power Administration
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Food and Drug Administration
Health Resources and Services Administration
Coast Guard
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Fish and Wildlife Service
Land Management Bureau
Drug Enforcement Administration
Employee Benefits Security Administration
Employment and Training Administration
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Comptroller of the Currency
Internal Revenue Service
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Final rule.
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a design approval holder (DAH) evaluation indicating that the outer wing lower junction is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This AD requires modifying the fastener holes at certain locations, which includes related investigative actions and applicable corrective actions. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective July 3, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of July 3, 2018.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax: +33 5 61 93 44 51; email:
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax: 206-231-3225.
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2017-0122, dated July 18, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222, -304, -308, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes. The MCAI states:
In response to the FAA Part 26 rule, wing structural items of the Airbus A310 design were assessed regarding Widespread Fatigue Damage (WFD) phenomenon. One outcome was that the outer wing lower junction is prone to WFD at level of the first fasteners row, close to Rib 1 between Frame (FR) 40 and FR 47.
This condition, if not corrected, could reduce the structural integrity of the wing.
Prompted by the conclusion of WFD analysis, Airbus issued Service Bulletin (SB) A310-57-2105 to provide modification instructions. The accomplishment of this modification at the specified time will recondition/renovate/extend the life of the fasteners holes at Rib 1, in order to reach the Limit Of Validity.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires cold working of the affected holes at Rib 1, stiffeners 1 to 14, on both outer wings between FR 40 and FR 47.
Required actions include a modification of the fastener holes at rib 1, stiffeners 1 to 14, on both outer wings between FR 40 and FR 47 by cold-working. The modification includes related investigative actions and applicable corrective actions. The related investigative actions include a rotating probe test of the fastener holes for cracks and checking the hole diameter for certain diameters. The corrective action is repair.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. We considered the comment received. FedEx supported the NPRM.
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A310-57-2105, Revision 00, dated November 23, 2016. The service information describes procedures for a modification of the fastener holes at rib 1, stiffeners 1 to 14, on both outer wings between FR 40 and FR 47 by cold-working and includes related investigative actions and corrective actions. This service information is reasonably available because the
We estimate that this AD affects 13 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repair that will be required based on the results of the inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this repair:
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD is effective July 3, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to all Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes, certificated in any category.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.
This AD was prompted by a design approval holder (DAH) evaluation indicating that the outer wing lower junction is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD to prevent WFD at the outer wing lower junction, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Before exceeding the compliance time specified in figure 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, as applicable, or within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Modify the fastener holes at rib 1, stiffeners 1 to 14, on both outer wings between frame (FR) 40 and FR 47, including doing all related investigative and applicable corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310-57-2105, Revision 00, dated November 23, 2016, except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD. Do all related investigative and applicable corrective actions before further flight.
Where Airbus Service Bulletin A310-57-2105, Revision 00, dated November 23, 2016, specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action, and specifies that action as “RC” (Required for Compliance): Before further flight, accomplish corrective actions in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2017-0122, dated July 18, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax: 206-231-3225.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A310-57-2105, Revision 00, dated November 23, 2016.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax: +33 5 61 93 44 51; email:
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule; request for comments.
We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics Model SAAB 2000 airplanes. This AD requires a one-time inspection of the aileron bellcrank support brackets and a thickness measurement of the affected lug attaching the support bracket; repetitive inspections of the affected aileron bellcrank support brackets; and corrective actions if necessary. This AD also provides an optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This AD was prompted by the identification of a manufacturing defect on certain aileron bellcrank support brackets that resulted in the material thickness of the affected lug attaching the support bracket to the rear spar of the wing to be insufficient. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD becomes effective June 13, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publications listed in this AD as of June 13, 2018.
We must receive comments on this AD by July 13, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics, SE-581 88, Linköping, Sweden; telephone +46 13 18 5591; fax +46 13 18 4874; email
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3220.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2018-0103, dated April 30, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics Model SAAB 2000 airplanes. The MCAI states:
A manufacturing defect was identified on certain aileron bellcrank support brackets, installed on the outboard section of the left hand (LH) and right hand (RH) wing. The material thickness of the lugs attaching the support bracket to the rear spar of the wing was found to be insufficient.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could, in case of an aileron jamming, lead to support bracket failure, possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane.
To address this potential unsafe condition, SAAB issued the SB [Saab Service Bulletin 2000-27-056, dated April 18, 2018] to provide instructions for inspection and replacement of affected support brackets.
For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-time inspection of all support brackets to determine the thickness and, depending on findings, repetitive inspections of the affected support brackets. This [EASA] AD also requires reporting the measured thickness, and replacement of all affected support brackets with serviceable support brackets, which constitutes terminating action.
You may examine the MCAI on the internet at
Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics has issued Saab Service Bulletin 2000-27-056, dated April 18, 2018. The service information describes procedures for a detailed visual inspection for cracks, corrosion, and damage (including missing paint) of the affected lug and the adjacent area of the installed aileron bellcrank support brackets on the left hand and right hand wing; a thickness measurement of the affected lug attaching the support bracket to the rear spar of the wing, and replacement of aileron bellcrank support brackets. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
The MCAI requires replacing all affected support brackets. However, the planned compliance time for the replacement would allow enough time to provide notice and opportunity for prior public comment on the merits of the replacement. Therefore, we are considering a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) requiring this replacement, which would terminate the repetitive inspections required by this AD.
An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because the material thickness of the affected lug attaching the aileron bellcrank support bracket to the rear spar of the wing have been found to be insufficient, which, in the event of an aileron jam, could lead to support bracket failure and possible reduced control of the airplane. Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days.
This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
We estimate that this AD affects 8 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary on-condition actions that would be required based on the results of any required actions. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:
We estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the reporting requirement in this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S. operators to be $85 per product.
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This AD becomes effective June 13, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (formerly known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Model SAAB 2000 airplanes, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight controls.
This AD was prompted by the identification of a manufacturing defect on certain aileron bellcrank support brackets that resulted in the material thickness of the affected lug attaching the support bracket to the rear spar of the wing to be insufficient. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct the defect of the aileron bellcrank support bracket, which, in the event of an aileron jam, could lead to failure of the support bracket and result in reduced controllability of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(1) For the purposes of this AD, affected support brackets are aileron bellcrank support brackets, part number (P/N) 7327993-813 and P/N 7327993-814, for which it has been determined that the affected lug attaching the support bracket to the rear spar of the wing has a thickness of less than 2.75 mm (0.108 in.), as specified in Saab Service Bulletin 2000-27-056, dated April 18, 2018.
(2) For the purposes of this AD, serviceable support brackets are aileron bellcrank support brackets, P/N 7327993-813 and P/N 7327993-814, for which it has been determined that the affected lug attaching the support bracket to the rear spar of the wing has a thickness of 2.75 mm (0.108 in.) or more, as specified in Saab Service Bulletin 2000-27-056, dated April 18, 2018.
Within 100 flight cycles or 30 days, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD, accomplish a detailed visual inspection for cracks, corrosion, and damage (including missing paint) of the affected lug and the adjacent area of the aileron bellcrank support brackets installed on the left hand (LH) and right hand (RH) wing, and measure the thickness of the affected lug attaching the support bracket to the rear spar of the wing, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Saab Service Bulletin 2000-27-056, dated April 18, 2018.
If, during the measurement required by paragraph (h) of this AD, it is determined that the affected lug attaching the aileron bellcrank support bracket to the rear spar of the wing has a thickness of less than 2.75 mm (0.108 in.), at intervals not to exceed 100 flight cycles, accomplish a detailed visual inspection for cracks, corrosion, and damage (including missing paint) of that affected support bracket in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Saab Service Bulletin 2000-27-056, dated April 18, 2018. Accomplishing the replacement specified in paragraph (k) of this AD terminates the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph for that bracket.
If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) or (i) of this AD, any crack, corrosion, or damage (including missing paint) is found, before further flight, obtain corrective actions instructions approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics' EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature. Accomplish the corrective actions within the compliance time specified therein. If no compliance time is specified in the corrective actions instructions, accomplish the corrective action before further flight.
Replacing each affected support bracket with a serviceable support bracket, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Saab Service Bulletin 2000-27-056, dated April 18, 2018, terminates the inspections required by paragraph (i) of this AD for that airplane.
Within 15 days after the measurement as required by paragraph (h) of this AD, or within 15 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, report the results to Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics in accordance with the instruction provided in Figure 1, “Aileron Bellcrank Support Fitting—Inspection,” of Saab Service Bulletin 2000-27-056, dated April 18, 2018.
As of the effective date of this AD, it is allowed to install on any airplane an aileron bellcrank support bracket P/N 7327993-813 or P/N 7327993-814, provided it is a serviceable support bracket.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Airworthiness Directive 2018-0103, dated April 30, 2018, for related information. You may examine the MCAI on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3220.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Saab Service Bulletin 2000-27-056, dated April 18, 2018.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics, SE 581 88, Linköping, Sweden; telephone +46 13 18 5591; fax +46 13 18 4874; email
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
This action modifies five VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal airways (V-12, V-214, V-340, V-467, and V-517) and one low altitude area navigation (RNAV) route (T-213) in the vicinity of Richmond, IN. The FAA is taking this action due to the planned decommissioning of the Richmond, IN, VHF Omnidirectional Range/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) navigation aid (NAVAID) which provides navigation guidance for portions of the affected ATS routes. Overall, this action enhances the safety and management of aircraft within the National Airspace System (NAS).
Effective date 0901 UTC, September 13, 2018. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.
FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.
Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it modifies the NAS route structure as necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic.
The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the
This document amends FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to remove the V-517 airway segment between the Cincinnati, OH, VORTAC and the Dayton, OH, VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME). That proposed amendment incorrectly listed the state reference for the Cincinnati, KY, VORTAC as “OH” in the proposed amendment and in the regulatory text for V-517. The corrected V-517 amendment is to remove the airway segment between the Cincinnati, KY, VORTAC and the Dayton, OH, VOR/DME and the V-517 regulatory text is to reflect the airway ending at the Cincinnati, KY, VORTAC. This rule corrects the state reference for the Cincinnati, KY, VORTAC.
The FAA is amending Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to modify VOR Federal airways V-12, V-214, V-340, V-467, and V-517, and low altitude RNAV route T-213. The planned decommissioning of the Richmond, IN, VORTAC has made these actions necessary. The VOR Federal airway and RNAV T-route changes are outlined below.
All radials in the route descriptions are unchanged and stated in True degrees.
VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a), and United States Area Navigation Routes (low altitude T-routes) are published in paragraph 6011, of FAA Order 7400.11B dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR Federal airways and RNAV T-route listed in this document will be subsequently published in the Order.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
The FAA has determined that this action of modifying five VOR Federal airways and one low altitude RNAV route qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, Paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points). As such, this action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further analysis. The FAA determined that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact study.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
From Gaviota, CA; San Marcus, CA; Palmdale, CA; 38 miles, 6 miles wide, Hector, CA; 12 miles, 38 miles, 85 MSL, 14 miles, 75 MSL, Needles, CA; 45 miles, 34 miles, 95 MSL, Drake, AZ; Winslow, AZ; 30 miles, 85 MSL, Zuni, NM; Albuquerque, NM; Otto, NM; Anton Chico, NM; Tucumcari, NM; Amarillo, TX; Mitbee, OK; Anthony, KS; Wichita, KS; Emporia, KS; INT Emporia 063° and Napoleon, MO, 243° radials; Napoleon; INT Napoleon 095° and Columbia, MO, 292° radials; Columbia; Foristell, MO; Troy, IL; Bible Grove, IL; to Shelbyville, IN. From Allegheny, PA; Johnstown, PA; Harrisburg, PA; INT Harrisburg 092° and Pottstown, PA, 278° radials; to Pottstown.
From Kokomo IN, Marion, IN; to Muncie, IN. From INT Appleton, OH, 236° and Zanesville, OH, 274° radials; Zanesville; Bellaire, OH; INT Bellaire 107° and Grantsville, MD, 285° radials; Grantsville; Martinsburg, WV; INT Martinsburg 094° and Baltimore, MD, 300° radials; Baltimore; INT Baltimore 093° and Dupont, DE, 223° radials; Dupont; Yardley, PA; to Teterboro, NJ.
From INT Peotone, IL, 053° and Knox, IN, 297° radials; Knox; to Fort Wayne, IN.
From Waterville, OH; to Detroit, MI.
From Snowbird, TN; INT Snowbird 329° and London, KY, 141° radials; London; INT London 004° and Falmouth, KY, 164° radials; Falmouth; to Cincinnati, KY.
Department of the Army, DoD.
Final rule.
This final rule removes DoD's regulation concerning the use of force by Department of the Army personnel engaged in law enforcement and security duties. This part conveys internal Army policy and procedures, and is unnecessary.
This rule is effective on May 29, 2018.
Jimmy Blankenship at 703-697-7024.
It has been determined that publication of this CFR part removal for public comment is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public interest since it is based on removing DoD internal policies and procedures that are publically available on the Department's website.
DoD internal guidance will continue to be published in Army Regulation 190-14, “Carrying of Firearms and Use of Force for Law Enforcement and Security Duties,” available at
This rule is not significant under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” therefore, E.O. 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs” does not apply.
Law enforcement, Military law, Military personnel, Security measures.
Department of the Army, DoD.
Final rule.
This final rule removes DoD's regulation concerning the use of motor vehicles on specific military installations. This part conveys Army policy and procedures duplicated in 32 CFR part 634, and it is unnecessary.
This rule is effective on May 29, 2018.
Daniel Perkins at 703-614-3309.
It has been determined that publication of this CFR part removal for public comment is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to public interest since it is based on content which is duplicated in 32 CFR part 634.
DoD internal guidance will continue to be published in Army Regulation 190-5, “Motor Vehicle Traffic Supervision,” available at
This rule is not significant under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” therefore, E.O. 13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs” does not apply.
Federal buildings and facilities, Traffic regulations.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.
The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Metro North (Park Avenue) Bridge across the Harlem River, mile 2.1, at Bronx, New York. This temporary deviation is necessary to allow the bridge to open for marine traffic with 24 hour advance notice during construction in the bridge control room.
This deviation is effective from 12:01 a.m. on June 4, 2018, to 11:59 p.m. on July 31, 2018.
The docket for this deviation, USCG-2018-0437 is available at
If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Judy Leung-Yee, Bridge Management Specialist, First District Bridge Branch, U.S. Coast Guard, telephone 212-514-4336, email
MTA Metro-North Railroad, the bridge owner, requested a temporary deviation from the normal operating schedule to allow the bridge to open for marine traffic with 24 hour advance notice during construction in the bridge control room. The Metro North (Park Avenue) Bridge across the Harlem River, mile 2.1, has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 25 feet at mean high water and 30 feet at mean low water. The existing bridge operating regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.789(c).
Under this temporary deviation, from 12:01 a.m. on June 4, 2018, to 11:59 p.m. on July 31, 2018 the Metro North (Park Avenue) Bridge shall open on signal provided if at least a twenty-four hour advance notice is given. The draw need not open for the passage of vessel traffic from 5 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 8 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The waterway is transited by commercial and recreational traffic. The
The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of enforcement of regulation.
The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone around vessels involved in Coast Guard training exercises in Hood Canal, WA from July 9, 2018 through July 13, 2018, unless cancelled sooner by the Captain of the Port. This is necessary to ensure the safety of the maritime public and vessels participating in these exercises. During the enforcement period, entry into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or her Designated Representative.
The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1339 will be enforced from 8 a.m. on July 9, 2018 through 5 p.m. on July 13, 2018.
If you have questions about this notice of enforcement, call or email Petty Officer Zachary Spence, Sector Puget Sound Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard; telephone 206-217-6051, email
The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone around vessels involved in Coast Guard training exercises in Hood Canal, WA set forth in 33 CFR 165.1339, from 8 a.m. on July 9, 2018 through 5 p.m. on July 13, 2018, unless cancelled sooner by the Captain of the Port. Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1339, no person or vessel may enter or remain within 500 yards of any vessel involved in Coast Guard training exercises while such vessel is transiting Hood Canal, WA between Foul Weather Bluff and the entrance to Dabob Bay, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or a Designated Representative. In addition, the regulation requires all vessels to obtain permission for entry during the enforcement period by contacting the on-scene patrol commander on VHF channel 13 or 16, or the Sector Puget Sound Joint Harbor Operations Center at 206-217-6001. Members of the maritime public will be able to identify participating vessels as those flying the Coast Guard Ensign. The COTP may also be assisted in the enforcement of the zone by other federal, state, or local agencies. In addition to this notice of enforcement in the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule; correcting amendment.
This document corrects an error in the amendatory instruction in a final rule pertaining to the sulfur dioxide (SO
This final rule is effective on May 29, 2018.
John Summerhays, Environmental Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6067,
On February 1, 2018 (83 FR 4591), EPA published a final rule approving Illinois' plans addressing nonattainment area planning requirements for SO
In the final rule published in the
Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. We have determined that there is good cause for making today's rule final without prior proposal and opportunity for comment because we are merely correcting an incorrect citation in a previous action. Thus, notice and public procedure are unnecessary. We find that this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
Under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and is therefore not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to E.O. 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action is not an E.O. 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because this action is not significant under E.O. 12866. Because the agency has made a “good cause” finding that this action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act or any other statute as indicated in the
This technical correction action does not involve technical standards; thus the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. The rule also does not involve special consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by E.O. 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct, as required by section 3 of E.O. 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996). EPA has complied with E.O. 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1998) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the “Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings” issued under the executive order. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Accordingly, 40 CFR part 52 is corrected by making the following correcting amendments:
42 U.S.C. 7401
The additions and revisions read as follows:
(c) * * *
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a temporary modification of the boundaries of the Massachusetts Bay Dredged Material Disposal Site (MBDS) pursuant to the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA), as amended. The purpose of this temporary site modification is to allow for the environmental restoration of a particular area adjacent to the MBDS (Potential Restoration Area) by temporarily expanding the boundaries of the existing MBDS. The temporary expansion is a circular area that contains the Potential Restoration Area, which includes most of the historic Industrial Waste Site (IWS). Decades ago, the IWS was used for the disposal of barrels containing industrial, chemical and low-level radioactive waste, as well as for the disposal of munitions, ordnance, construction equipment, and contaminated dredged material. The modification of the disposal site boundary will enable the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to place suitable dredged material generated from the Boston Harbor Deep Draft Navigation Project at the Potential Restoration Area in order to cover the barrels and other wastes disposed there in the past. This is expected to improve environmental conditions at the site. The Deep Draft Navigation Project includes improvement dredging of the main ship channel, which will generate approximately 11 million cubic yards (cy) of dredged material. The existing MBDS will continue to be used for disposal of other dredging projects, as usual. The expansion area will permanently close upon completion of the Boston Harbor Deep Draft Navigation Project, while the existing MBDS will remain open for the disposal of other suitable dredged material. Like the MBDS, however, the expansion area will be subject to ongoing monitoring and management to monitor the recovery of the area and to ensure continued protection of the marine environment.
The effective date of this rule is June 28, 2018.
The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OW-2017-0528. All documents in the docket are listed on the
The supporting document for this site modification is the
Alicia Grimaldi, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Mail Code: OEP 6-1, Boston, MA 02109; telephone—(617) 918-1806; fax—(617) 918-0806; email address—
The expansion of the MBDS is a temporary modification made in order to improve environmental conditions at the Potential Restoration Area by allowing suitable dredged material from the USACE Boston Harbor improvement project to be placed over wastes dumped in the past at the historic IWS. The USACE are persons potentially affected by this action, as they are responsible for the Boston Harbor Deep Draft Navigation Project and the disposal of dredged material into ocean waters under MPRSA. The existing MBDS will continue to be used for the disposal of dredged material from other projects that is suitable for ocean disposal pursuant to the MPRSA. This action will also impact those fishermen who utilize the historic IWS for fishing, despite posted warnings, by helping to reduce the risk of potential injury resulting from the inadvertent retrieval of wastes from the IWS in their nets. There have been documented instances of fishermen trawling up barrels in the IWS area and this action will lower the risk of that occurring in the future.
The IWS is a disposal site in Massachusetts Bay approximately 20 nautical miles (nmi) east of Boston that was used in the past for disposal of a variety of wastes that would not be permitted for disposal today. The IWS is a circular site with its center at 42°25.7′ N, 70°35.0′ W and a radius of 1 nmi. It is believed that disposal of derelict vessels, construction debris, commercial waste, and dredged material at the area may have begun in the early 1900s. There are records dating back to the 1940s documenting the disposal of radioactive, chemical and hospital waste, ordnance, munitions, etc. Use of the IWS was discontinued in 1977 and the site was officially de-designated in 1990 (55 FR 3688, February 2, 1990). From 1977 through 1993, there was an Interim Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site for dredged material disposal with a center 1 nmi east of the IWS at 42°25.7′ N, 70°34.0′ W and a radius of 1 nmi. In 1993, the existing MBDS was designated by EPA with a center at 42°25.1′ N, 70°35.0′ W and a radius of 1 nmi, an area of 3.14 nmi
The USACE will begin the Boston Harbor improvement dredging project in 2018. The project is expected to generate approximately 11 million cy of suitable dredged material consisting primarily of Boston blue clay and glacial till. EPA and USACE are proposing to use this dredged material beneficially by covering the area in and around the historic IWS barrel field to a depth of one to two meters. This will be accomplished utilizing a method of disposal developed and tested by the USACE, which is designed to prevent direct impact of sediment onto waste containers. This method of disposal is intended to reduce the risk of breaking barrels and resuspending potentially contaminated seafloor sediment.
Before any entity can dispose of dredged material at the MBDS, EPA and the USACE must evaluate the project according to the ocean dumping regulatory criteria (40 CFR 227) and determine whether to authorize the disposal. Under Section 103 of the MPRSA, disposal projects are authorized by the USACE and EPA independently evaluates proposed disposal projects and has the right to restrict and/or reject the disposal of dredged material if it determines that the environmental protection requirements under the MPRSA have not been met. This modification to the MBDS site boundaries does not constitute an approval by EPA or USACE for open-water disposal of dredged material from any specific project. Thus, although the plan is that suitable material from the USACE's Boston Harbor improvement project would be placed at the temporary expansion area, any material proposed for disposal will have to go through project-specific review and approval.
This Final Rule temporarily modifies the MBDS by expanding it to include the Potential Restoration Area, which encompasses the IWS barrel field. The expansion will be temporary, opening upon the effective date of the Final Rule and closing upon completion of the Boston Harbor Deep Draft Navigation Project. The temporarily expanded site will consist of two partially overlapping circles:
The area of the temporarily modified MBDS is 4.60 nmi
On September 22, 2017, EPA published a Proposed Rule proposing to temporarily modify the MBDS with a supporting Draft Environmental Assessment and opened a public comment period under Docket ID EPA-R01-OW-2017-0528. The comment period ended on October 23, 2017. EPA received eleven comments on the Proposed Rule and Draft Environmental Assessment. The comments received are listed below:
• Support of the temporary expansion of the MBDS (6 commenters);
• Boundaries of the temporary expansion of the MBDS overlap with the Neptune Deepwater Port (1 commenter);
• Importance of proceeding with disposal carefully to prevent breakage of barrels (4 commenters);
• Barrels may no longer exist on the seafloor (1 commenter);
• Sewage sludge should not be disposed in the ocean or used for capping (1 commenter);
• There is no evidence of contamination at the IWS (1 commenter);
• Disposing material further out into the ocean is a cheaper solution (1 commenter);
• Other disposal sites were not considered (1 commenter);
• The temporary expansion of the MBDS will eliminate fishable bottom (2 commenters);
• How to stay informed on the status of the project (2 commenters);
• Disposal could impact the health of the ecosystem (1 commenter);
• Typographic errors in Draft EA (1 commenter);
• Modification of the MBDS will change the size of the SBNMS (1 commenter);
• The Potential Restoration Area will increase with additional dredged material (1 commenter);
• The removal of barrels from the IWS was not considered as an alternative (2 commenters);
• Ensure that the disposal of dredged material and the temporary expansion is monitored (2 commenters);
• The Massachusetts Department of Marine Fisheries (MDMF) would like to consult on disposal time-of-year restrictions to minimize impact to cod spawning (1 commenter); and
• MDMF would like the USACE and EPA to continue participating in a working group exploring other opportunities for beneficial use of dredged material (1 commenter).
The responses to these comments can be found in the
There will be two distinct areas of the modified MBDS: The existing MBDS and the temporary expansion. The existing MBDS will continue to be utilized as a dredged material disposal site for those projects generating dredged material suitable for open-water disposal under the MPRSA. The temporary expansion will be used solely for the disposal of suitable dredged material generated from the Boston Harbor improvement dredging project. Management of both the existing MBDS and the temporary expansion will abide by the Site Management and Monitoring Plan (SMMP) for the MBDS. The SMMP includes management and monitoring requirements to ensure that the any dredged material placed at the sites is suitable for ocean disposal and that the adverse impacts of disposal, if any, are addressed to the maximum extent practicable. The SMMP for the MBDS includes restrictions on disposal vessel speeds, requirements for the presence of a marine mammal observer for each disposal event, and other guidelines to minimize any potential conflicts with threatened or endangered species and other uses or activities in this area.
EPA has assessed the temporary modification to the MBDS according to the criteria of the MPRSA, with particular emphasis on the general and specific regulatory criteria of 40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6, to determine whether the site modification satisfies those criteria. The
(a)
Since its designation in 1993, disposal at the MBDS has not interfered with other activities in the marine environment. It is anticipated that this also will be the case for the temporarily modified MBDS. The IWS has been closed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) since 1980 to the harvesting of surf clams and ocean quahogs. There is also a warning from NOAA and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on all nautical charts against harvesting fish and shellfish in the area. The expanded MBDS area has low recreational boater density and does not overlap with the shipping lanes into and out of Boston Harbor.
(b)
The modified MBDS will be used only for dredged material suitable for ocean disposal under the MPRSA. USACE also models disposal projects to evaluate their potential to violate water quality standards. The nearest shoreline to the modified MBDS is approximately eight nmi to the north. The prevailing current is not expected to transport dredged material to surrounding beaches or shores. Temporary changes caused by the physical movement of sediment through the water column will be reduced to ambient conditions before reaching any environmentally sensitive area. The SBNMS is immediately east of the site, but a steep bathymetric rise between the two features provides containment of dredged material in the deeper area known as Stellwagen Basin. There are no known geographically-limited fisheries or shellfisheries in the project area.
(d)
The size and configuration of the temporarily modified MBDS is specifically designed to allow for the IWS barrel field to be covered by suitable dredged material generated during the USACE Boston Harbor improvement project. The MBDS area has been monitored under the USACE Disposal Area Monitoring System (DAMOS) program since the late 1970s. Monitoring will continue at the temporarily expanded MBDS to prevent adverse long-range impacts.
(e)
The continental shelf is over 220 nmi east of Boston. Therefore, transporting material to, and performing long-term monitoring at, a site located off the continental shelf is not economically or operationally feasible. Moreover, taking material somewhere off the continental shelf will not help to isolate the wastes previously placed at the IWS. The
(1)
The temporarily expanded MBDS is located in an area of Massachusetts Bay known as Stellwagen Basin and is approximately eight nmi from the nearest coastline in Gloucester, MA. The depth of the temporarily expanded site ranges from 70-91 m. The seafloor in the area is primarily flat and consists primarily of silt and clay. There are two large glacial knolls included within the boundaries of the temporary expansion, both roughly 20 m high. These knolls are not included in the Potential Restoration Area and, therefore, no disposal will take place on them. There is a smaller glacial knoll, approximately six m high, included within the boundaries of the Potential Restoration Area. The USACE is drafting a project design that will ensure that this feature will be avoided by disposal operations.
(2)
The MBDS area contains Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for various fish species, and certain species of whale and sea turtle listed as either threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) have been sighted in the vicinity of the MBDS. Furthermore, the entirety of Massachusetts Bay and most of the larger Gulf of Maine are designated as critical foraging habitat for the North Atlantic Right Whale by NMFS. At the same time, NMFS has determined that dredged material disposal at the MBDS would not impact any of these species and restrictions are in place to ensure their safety, including vessel speed limitations and the requirement that marine mammal observers accompany the USACE on vessels during disposal operations. Furthermore, any risk of contaminants entering the food web is expected to be minimized by the covering of the IWS barrel field.
(3)
The closest beach to the temporarily expanded MBDS is 10 nmi away. The SBNMS is just east of the MBDS. Past dredged material disposal has not impacted the SBNMS and no impact to the SBNMS is expected with the temporary expansion of the MBDS.
(4)
The MBDS is only to be used for the disposal of dredged material that is suitable for ocean disposal under the MPRSA. The temporary expansion of the MBDS will only be used for suitable dredged material generated during the USACE Boston Harbor improvement project. Disposal within the temporary expansion will utilize a berm-building technique devised by the USACE in order to minimize the risk of barrel breakage or resuspension of potentially contaminated seafloor sediment.
(5)
The MBDS is monitored through the DAMOS program under the guidance of the SMMP. Disposal is also monitored through the National Dredging Quality Management Program to confirm accurate placement of dredged material. The area of temporary expansion will be included in the monitoring of the MBDS under the DAMOS program from the time of first disposal for as long as MBDS monitoring continues.
(6)
Current velocities range from 0-30 cm/s in the MBDS area. Currents are influenced by tides in a rotational manner, but net water movement is to the southeast. Regional dredged material is primarily made up of fine sand, silt, and clay. Dredged material generated during the USACE Boston Harbor improvement project is primarily Boston blue clay, which is cohesive and, therefore, settles rapidly. Minimal horizontal mixing or vertical stratification of dredged material occurs, resulting in low suspended sediment concentrations. Previous modeling of initial disposal indicates no adverse impacts in the water column or violations of water quality criteria. Previous studies have demonstrated the relative immobility of dredged material at the MBDS. Storms with the potential to cause sediment resuspension at the MBDS are rare in Massachusetts Bay.
(7)
Beginning in the early 1900s, the historic IWS was used for the disposal of industrial, chemical, medical, low-level radioactive, and other hazardous wastes, in addition to contaminated dredged material, construction debris, derelict vessels, etc. An Interim MBDS was designated in 1977 for the disposal of dredged material and it was closed in 1993, when the existing MBDS was designated following all the requirements of the MPRSA and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Studies and monitoring of the area have shown no significant impacts on water quality, sediment quality, or marine resources. More information regarding the effects of disposal in the area can be found in the
(8)
Extensive shipping, fishing, recreational, and scientific research activities take place in Massachusetts Bay throughout the year. Dredged material disposal operations at the MBDS have not interfered with these activities and temporarily expanding the MBDS is not expected to interfere with these activities either. Due to the hazardous nature of material historically disposed in the IWS, a warning to fishermen against fishing and shellfishing in the area is already included on all nautical charts, and the area is closed for the harvesting of ocean quahogs and surf clams. Therefore, disposal operations in the area are not expected to interfere with any existing fishing activity. To the extent that fishermen ignore the warnings regarding the IWS, the proposed action will not create any greater interference because, as stated above, both fishing and dredged material disposal activities have long been carried out in the area of the MBDS without interference. Moreover, once the IWS barrel field is covered, the area should be safer for any fishermen who drag their nets through that area.
(9)
Monitoring at the disposal area has taken place since the late 1970s under the DAMOS program. Surveys at the MBDS have detected no significant differences in water quality or biological
(10)
There are no known components of dredged material or consequences of its disposal that would attract or result in the recruitment or development of nuisance species at the expanded MBDS. Nuisance species have not been detected in any survey of the area.
(11)
There are two known shipwrecks within the boundaries of the existing MBDS: a Coast Guard vessel and a 55-foot fishing boat. Both were intentionally sunk in 1981 and are not considered to be historically significant. Additional shipwrecks have been revealed in the general area during subsequent surveys, although there are no identified shipwrecks within the Potential Restoration Area. Disposal operations have avoided and will continue to avoid any shipwrecks in the project area by implementing a fifty-meter buffer around known shipwrecks within which no disposal will occur.
Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 to 4370f, requires federal agencies to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. When a federal agency evaluates an action that it plans to take and finds that it will not significantly affect the environment, it may issue an Environmental Assessment and a Finding of No Significant Impact (
NEPA does not apply to EPA designations of ocean disposal sites under the MPRSA because EPA's actions under the MPRSA are exempt from the procedural requirements of NEPA through the functional equivalence doctrine. Nevertheless, as a matter of policy, EPA undertakes a NEPA review for certain of its regulatory actions, including the designation of dredged material disposal sites under Section 102 of the MPRSA. The EPA's “Notice of Policy and Procedures for Voluntary Preparation of NEPA Documents” (Voluntary NEPA Policy), 63 FR 58045 (October 29, 1998), sets out both the policy and procedures the EPA uses when preparing such environmental review documents.
The EPA's primary voluntary NEPA document addressing the temporary expansion of the MBDS is the
EPA integrated the EFH assessment into the Draft EA, pursuant to Section 305(b), 16 U.S.C. 1855(b)(2), of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, as amended (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801-1891d, and submitted that assessment to NMFS on September 28, 2017. NMFS responded via letter with a recommendation to avoid disposal on the glacial knoll that is within the boundaries of the Potential Restoration Area. EPA and USACE have adopted this recommendation and will avoid the disposal of any dredged material on this feature. This recommendation has also been incorporated into the Final EA.
EPA determined that the modification of the MBDS is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of the Massachusetts coastal management program, and a letter was submitted to the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management (MCZM) on September 28, 2017. MCZM submitted a letter of concurrence to EPA on November 30, 2017.
The Endangered Species Act, as amended (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1531 to 1544, requires federal agencies to consult with NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by the federal agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of any critical habitat. The EPA incorporated an assessment of the potential effects of temporarily modifying the MBDS on aquatic and wildlife species, including any species listed under the ESA, into the Draft EA, and EPA has submitted that assessment to NMFS and FWS. EPA concluded that this action is not likely to adversely affect any threatened or endangered species, nor would it adversely modify any designated critical habitat. EPA submitted a letter to NMFS on October 30, 2017, that stated that the re-initiation of consultation was not necessary for this action. NMFS submitted a letter of concurrence to EPA on November 21, 2017. EPA sent a letter to FWS on September 22, 2017, and confirmed that no consultation was necessary.
The National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. 470 to 470a-2, requires federal agencies to take into account the effect of their actions on districts, sites, buildings, structures, or objects, included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historical Places. EPA submitted a letter to the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on September 28, 2017, outlining the plan to avoid the historic shipwrecks in the area during disposal operations. The Massachusetts SHPO provided a letter of concurrence with the avoidance plan to EPA on October 19, 2017.
This rulemaking proposes the modification of an ODMDS pursuant to Section 102 of the MPRSA. This action complies with applicable Executive Orders and statutory provisions as follows:
This action is not a “significant regulatory action” under the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 3, 1993) and is, therefore, not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires federal agencies to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (businesses, organizations, or jurisdictions). EPA has determined that this action will not have a significant economic impact on small entities.
This action contains no federal mandates under the provisions of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531 to 1538, for state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. This action imposes no new enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small government entities. Those entities are already subject to existing permitting requirements for the disposal of dredged material in ocean waters.
This action does not have federalism implications. It does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action. In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between the EPA and state and local governments, EPA has coordinated with, and specifically solicited comments from, state and local officials with regard to this action.
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The modification of the MBDS will not have a direct effect on Indian tribes, on the relationship between the federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866 and because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children.
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355) because it is not a “significant regulatory action” as defined under Executive Order 12866.
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards and, therefore, the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act does not apply.
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629) establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. The EPA determined that this action will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations. This action is expected to be protective of human health because it will enable the wastes already within the Potential Restoration Area to be isolated under a protective layer of sediment. This should help prevent any accidental recovery of barrels by fishermen and prevent contaminants from the historic disposal from entering the food web. The EPA has assessed the overall protectiveness of modifying the MBDS against the criteria established pursuant to the MPRSA to ensure that any adverse impact to the environment will be mitigated to the greatest extent practicable. No adverse impacts are expected. The action is, instead, expected to improve environmental conditions in Massachusetts Bay by enabling contaminated material dumped at the IWS in the past to be covered with suitable dredged material in order to isolate the former from the environment.
Executive Order 13158 (65 FR 34909, May 31, 2000) requires EPA to “expeditiously propose new science-based regulations, as necessary, to ensure appropriate levels of protection for the marine environment.” EPA may take action to enhance or expand protection of existing marine protected areas and to establish or recommend, as appropriate, new marine protected areas. The purpose of the Executive Order is to protect the significant natural and cultural resources with the marine environment, which includes, “those areas of coastal and ocean waters, the Great Lakes and their connecting waters, and submerged lands thereunder, over which the United States exercises jurisdiction, consistent with international law.”
EPA anticipates that this action will afford additional protection to the waters of Massachusetts Bay and organisms that inhabit them. By covering the barrel field and surrounding seafloor sediment of the historic IWS, potential contaminants should be prevented from entering the water column or food web in Massachusetts Bay. This should provide, if anything, greater protection for the natural resources of the SBNMS, which is in the vicinity of the temporarily expanded MBDS.
Section 6(a)(i) of Executive Order 13547, (75 FR 43023, July 19, 2010) requires, among other things, EPA and certain other agencies “ . . . to the fullest extent consistent with applicable law [to] . . . take such action as necessary to implement the policy set forth in section 2 of this order and the stewardship principles and national priority objectives as set forth in the Final Recommendations and subsequent guidance from the Council.” The policies in section 2 of Executive Order 13547 include, among other things, the following: “ . . . it is the policy of the United States to: (i) Protect, maintain, and restore the health and biological diversity of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems and resources; [and] (ii) improve the resiliency of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems, communities, and economies. . . .” As with Executive Order 13158 (Marine Protected Areas), the overall purpose of the Executive Order is to promote protection of ocean and coastal environmental resources.
EPA anticipates that this action will afford additional protection to the waters of Massachusetts Bay and organisms that inhabit them. By covering the barrel field and surrounding seafloor sediment of the historic IWS, potential contaminants should be prevented from entering the water column or food web in Massachusetts Bay.
This action would not be a “significant regulatory action” under the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 3, 1993) and is, therefore, not subject to review under Executive Order 13771.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
Environmental protection, Water pollution control.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, Chapter I, of the
33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(vi)
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
Proposed rule.
The Department of Homeland Security (“DHS” or “Department”) is proposing to remove its regulations pertaining to the international entreprepreneur program, which guided the adjudication of significant public benefit parole requests made by certain foreign entrepreneurs of start-up entities in the United States. After review of all DHS parole programs in accordance with an Executive Order (E.O.) titled, Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, issued on January 25, 2017, the DHS is proposing to end the IE parole program, and remove or revise the related regulations, because this program is not the appropriate vehicle for attracting and retaining international entrepreneurs and does not adequately protect U.S. investors and U.S. workers employed by or seeking employment with the start-up.
Written comments must be received on or before June 28, 2018.
You may submit comments, identified by DHS Docket No. USCIS-2015-0006, by any one of the following methods:
•
•
Steven Viger, Adjudications Officer, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20529-2140; Telephone (202) 272-8377 (not a toll free call).
Individuals with hearing or speech impairments may access the telephone numbers above via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1-877-889-5627 (TTY/TDD).
Interested persons are invited to comment on this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of the rule. Comments that will most assist DHS will focus on whether or not DHS should remove the IE parole program regulations and also explain the reasoning for each recommendation. Comments should include data, information, and the authority that supports each recommendation to the extent possible. Comments previously submitted to this docket do not need to be submitted again.
On January 17, 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS” or “Department”) published the IE Final Rule, with an effective date of July 17, 2017.
In addition to defining criteria that could support a favorable exercise of the Secretary's discretionary parole authority, the final rule established a period of initial parole for up to 30 months (which could be extended by up to an additional 30 months) to facilitate the applicant's ability to oversee and grow his or her start-up entity in the United States. The final rule also
On January 25, 2017, the President issued an executive order (E.O.) prescribing improvements to border security and immigration enforcement.
On July 11, 2017, DHS published a final rule with request for comments to delay the effective date of the IE Final Rule to March 14, 2018.
After review of the IE parole program regulations in accordance with E.O. Order 13767, DHS believes that the regulations comprising the IE parole program should be removed, and is soliciting public comments on its proposal to do so.
Although DHS continues to support the policy objectives of promoting investment and innovation in the United States, the Department believes that the extraordinary use of the Secretary's discretionary parole authority for this purpose set forth in the IE Final Rule is unwarranted and inadvisable for several reasons. First, this sort of complex and highly-structured program contemplated in the IE Final Rule is best left to the legislative procees rather than an unorthodox use of the Secretary's authority to “temporarily” parole, in a categorical way, otherwise inadmissible aliens into the United States for “significant public benefit.” INA 212(d)(5)(A), 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)(A). Second, the IE Final Rule constitutes an extraordinary use of the Secretary's parole authority, prescribing specific, detailed eligibility criteria and requiring exceptionally complex adjudications. Third, the IE Final Rule does not provide durable immigration solutions and in turn inadequately promotes the entrepreneur's ability to sustain the required investment and the jobs that depend on them. The Department believes that the Final Rule focused too narrowly on the economic benefits that potential foreign entrepreneurs may bring, without giving sufficient attention to the existing statutory scheme and the absence of a durable immigration status for these individuals, which is not made available through the device of temporary parole. Fourth, while the Department may eventually recover the costs relating to administration of the International Entrepreneur Rule, through fees paid by applicants for parole under the policy, use of the agency's present resources must be prioritized in light of the current Administration's priorities. As such, the Secretary believes that limited agency resources should not continue to be expended on this program, especially given the sort of difficult, complex, resource-intensive adjudications that the IE Final Rule requires, particularly in relation to other parole determinations. Finally, the Secretary is permitted to decide to exercise her discretionary parole authority under section 212(d)(5) more narrowly than her predecessor(s). The Secretary has elected to do so here for the reasons described herein and in the interest of the efficient, effective implementation of the current statutory scheme, which already prescribes conditions under which certain entrepreneurs and investors may obtain lawful immigration status (such as E-2 treaty investor nonimmigrant status), and in certain instances lawful permanent resident status in the United States (through investment of their own capital either under the employment-based fifth preference (EB-5) immigrant classification or through receipt of a National Interest Waiver of the job offer requirement under the employment-based second preference immigrant classification).
In the IE NPRM, DHS recognized that historically, DHS has exercised its parole authority on an ad hoc basis and with respect to individuals falling within certain classes of aliens identified by regulation or policy. 81 FR at 60134. DHS noted that its statutory parole authority is broad and that Congress did not define “significant public benefit.”
DHS stands by its previous findings that foreign entrepreneurs make substantial and positive contributions to innovation, economic growth, and job creation in the United States. DHS, however, has reevaluated the IE parole program and believes that the governing regulation should be removed as inadvisable, impracticable, and an unwarranted use of limited agency resources. The Department believes that parole, which allows for the “temporary” entry of inadmissible aliens into the United States for “urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit,” INA 212(d)(5)(A), is not an appropriate legal mechanism to establish and implement a complicated program for entrepreneurs and business startups that requires complex and time-consuming adjudications, both for initial parole and re-parole determinations.
The IE Final Rule's interpretation of significant public benefit, with its myriad and exceptionally detailed eligibility requirements relating to qualifying investments and start-up entities, amounted to an unconventional codification of significant public benefit parole criteria. Multiple commenters responding to the IE proposed rule opposed the rule because it sought to create an administrative program “for highly trained and talented entrepreneurs” without providing for durable immigration status or a concrete pathway to such a status, “when visa and residency pathways already exist” for such individuals. 82 FR at 5267. Upon further review and consideration of the IE Final Rule, DHS agrees with these commenters. The IE Final Rule focused too narrowly on the potential economic benefits that foreign entrepreneurs may bring, without giving sufficient attention to the existing statutory scheme wherein Congress has already provided pathways for certain entrepreneurs to come to the United States to start and grow their business, or to the absence of a durable immigration status for these individuals, which is not made available through the device of temporary parole.
In addition, agency resources are limited, and their use must be prioritized in light of the current Administration's priorities. As such, the Secretary believes that limited agency resources that are needed for other adjudications programs should not continue to be expended on this program, especially given the sort of difficult, complex, resource-intensive adjudications that the IE Final Rule requires, particularly in relation to other parole determinations, and the uncertain status that entrepreneurs would obtain.
These serious concerns motivate the reconsideration of this policy. The Secretary is permitted to decide to exercise her discretionary parole authority under section 212(d)(5) more narrowly than her predecessor(s). As proposed in this rule, the Secretary intends to apply more narrowly her discretionary parole authority for the reasons described herein and in the interest of the efficient, effective implementation of the current statutory scheme, which already prescribes conditions under which certain entrepreneurs and investors may obtain lawful immigration status, and eventually lawful permanent resident status, in the United States. DHS is therefore proposing to remove the regulations comprising the IE parole program.
DHS does not believe the framework of the rule adequately promotes the Administration's policy goals of attracting and
To the extent indirect paths for parolees to remain for longer periods already exist, those paths are inherently uncertain. Although parole under the IE Final Rule may be granted for up to 30 months, with possible re-parole for an additional 30 months, it is highly uncertain whether paroled entrepreneurs, including those who successfully start or grow a business in the United States, would qualify for an existing employment-based nonimmigrant or immigrant classification after an approved period of parole ends. The entrepreneur, if unable to qualify for an employment-based nonimmigrant or immigrant classification, most likely would be required to depart the United States and possibly move their operations abroad, eliminating possible further benefit to this country, and possibly creating some negative impacts to U.S. investors. Thus, reliance upon parole adds an additional degree of risk and unpredictability for the U.S. investors who may not be able to achieve the anticipated return on their investment, as well as any U.S. workers employed by or seeking employment with the start-up. This same degree of risk and unpredictability would generally not apply to entities started by U.S. entrepreneurs or even foreign entrepreneurs lawfully relying upon existing nonimmigrant or immigrant visa classifications. While DHS under the former Administration considered some of these risks, having re-evaluated the IE Final Rule consistent with President Trump's Executive Order, DHS now believes that they are significant negative factors supporting its decision to propose removing the IE Final Rule.
While DHS recognizes that some foreign entrepreneurs may face difficulty establishing eligibility under existing nonimmigrant and immigrant categories, options are still available for some foreign entrepreneurs, and removing the IE Final Rule would be more congruent with the overall statutory scheme.
Facilitating investment and innovation in the United States is of great importance to our country's ability to lead and remain competitive in the global marketplace. As indicated above, the United States has visa classifications that can be used by certain entrepreneurs or investors coming to the United States,
In addition to the considerations discussed above, DHS believes that continuing to administer the IE Final Rule is out of sync with DHS' current policy priorities. The President has tasked DHS with improving existing employment-based immigrant and nonimmigrant visa programs to ensure program integrity and protect the interests of U.S. workers. Given that USCIS already has an established process for assessing a variety of individual parole requests, DHS does not believe that it would be appropriate to continue to expend limited agency resources to administer a parallel and complex regulatory parole framework. The assessments required for a parole determination under this program—including, among others, to resolve “substantial ownership interest” questions, whether the entity has a “substantial potential for rapid growth and job creation,” whether the applicant is “well-positioned . . . to substantially assist” with the growth and success of the business, whether the start-up entity has received “lawfully derived capital,” whether the entity has received either the requisite investment threshold or qualifying “significant awards or grants for economic development” or both, and whether an investor is “qualified” under the rule and has an established record of successful investments—would be highly challenging and extremely labor intensive.
DHS thus proposes, at least in this context, returning to the use of significant public benefit parole as it existed prior to issuance of the IE Final Rule, leaving to Congress whether to establish an entrepreneur immigration program and, in the meantime, encouraging individuals to pursue immigrant and nonimmigrant opportunities already provided in the immigration laws.
Accordingly, DHS proposes to remove the IE parole regulations. DHS is not removing the unrelated revisions to 8 CFR 274a.2(b)(1)(v)(C)(
In proposing to end the IE parole program and remove the related regulations, DHS is actively considering the transition away from the program. To date, USCIS has received 13 IE parole applications. DHS has not yet granted parole under this program. Under the IE final rule, DHS has discretion to, on a case-by-case basis, approve periods of parole for up to 30 months, including shorter durations. In addition, DHS is considering a number of options for transitioning away from the IE parole program and is specifically soliciting public comments on these options. The options discussed below assume that the final rule removing the IE parole program regulations would go into effect 30 days after publication. The following discussion is organized into groupings by the stage of the parole process an individual may be in on the effective date of the rule finalizing the removal of IE parole program regulations.
a.
b.
For those cases where DHS decides that termination of parole is warranted, the individual's employment authorization would be terminated on the date of the final notice of termination. There would be no opportunity to appeal a parole termination decision.
c.
d.
a.
b.
c.
a.
b.
c.
Upon the termination of the IE parole program, individuals would not be able to seek re-parole under 8 CFR 212.19.
DHS is soliciting public comments on all of the options proposed for transitioning away from the IE parole program.
DHS is publishing this proposed rule to remove the IE parole program regulations with a 30-day comment period in the
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has been designated a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
As was described fully in Part IV, Statutory and Regulatory Requirements of the IE Final Rule,
In the IE Final Rule, DHS cited studies that provided general support for the positive effects of entrepreneurs, but did not attempt to estimate the total number of new jobs that might be produced or quantify any new economic activity that might take place. Here, DHS has not attempted to estimate the total number of jobs that might not be produced or to quantify any new economic activity that might not take place with the removal of this rule. This discussion regarding the net impact on economic activity, for which we specifically request comment, also depends critically on the extent to which entrepreneurs would avail themselves of other immigraton programs. The costs of this rule would also depend on the costs of the other programs to which entrepreneurs might avail themselves. However, DHS is not able to predict which other programs these entrepreneurs would be eligible for since it would be specific to the circumstances of the entrepreneur. Therefore, these costs are not quantified in this proposed rule and DHS requests any data or comments on such costs. DHS had previously estimated that 2,940 foreign nationals annually could be eligible to apply for parole under the IE Final Rule, but also stated “DHS has no way of predicting with certainty the actual number of foreign nationals who will seek parole under [the IE rule] rule over time.” 82 FR 5277. This remains true as of the publication of this proposal.
The filing costs associated with the IE Final Rule involved the application fees as well as the opportunity costs of time associated with filing. Each principal applicant faces a filing cost of $1,200 for the Application for Entrepreneur Parole (Form I-941), and additional costs of $405.32, which covered the costs of submitting biometric information and the time related opportunity costs of filing for parole. This additional monetized cost breakdown includes an $85 per applicant biometrics filing fee and $28.75 in costs incurred for travel to an application support center (ASC) to submit the information.
Opportunity costs reported for principal applicants are based on the 2016 average wage rate for all occupations, which were released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) in the Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) survey data publicly on March 31, 2017. These figures were updated from the costs in the IE final rule notice that relied on earlier wage rates and are thus slightly higher than the previous cost estimates. The wage data are found at:
In addition, the spouse of each principal is able to file for employment authorization under the IE Final Rule via an Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) with a filing fee of $410. DHS estimates that the Form I-765 would take 3.42 hours to complete, generating time related opportunity costs of $36.20. The total costs per applicant would be $446.20, which for 2,940 spousal applicants would result in total costs of $1,311,830.
In addition, DHS projected approximately 3,234 dependents could file an Application for Travel Document (Form I-131) and be required to submit biometrics. The fee for the Form I-131 is $575 and each applicant would face additional costs of $190.28, yielding a total cost per I-131 applicant of $765.28, which for the estimated 3,234 applicants would amount to $2,474,914.
This proposed rule would remove the IE parole program regulations and therefore, the filing costs described above would be sunk costs for those entrepreneurs who have applied for parole since the effective date, but would no longer maintain parole once this rule is finalized. Additionally, DHS assumes that there will be familiarization costs associated with this rule. DHS assumes that each entreprenuer who has applied or been approved for parole would need to review the rule. Similarly, DHS assumes that the start-up entity and its investors also would need to review the rule. Based on the 2,940 IEs referenced as a maximum number of entrepreneurs who may apply, DHS assumes a total of at least 2,940 entrepreneurs would likely need to review the rule. It is also likely that some investors, venture capitalists,
In addition to the filing costs and familiarization of the final rule withdrawing the International Entrepreneur parole program, those entrepreneurs and their dependents who have approved parole and would have already traveled to the United States could incur some additional costs by leaving the United States earlier than expected. Such costs could be associated with the early notice of termination of housing or vehicle leases or with removing dependent children from school among other costs. Additionally, these entrepreneurs would have expended money, time, and/or other resources in their start-up entity. Under the original IE final rule, entrepreneurs have to show ownership in the start-up at the time they apply for IE parole. Even if the IE has to leave the country, they can still remain owners and work for the start-up from outside of the country. The rescission of the IE parole program means that they cannot work for the start-up from within the United States on this basis. It is possible that when the IE leaves, the start-up could lose additional funding from both current and future investors, but it is also possible that current and future investors could be undeterred by the IE's departure and could continue to fund the start-up entity's continued operations and growth. DHS is not able to predict the behavior of these entrepreneurs or their investors at this time. Additionally, DHS notes that it is also possible that the start-up entity may have one or more co-founders/owners, and those co-founders/owners could be U.S. citizens or otherwise authorized to work in the United States. As such, the IE's temporary or permanent departure from the country would not automatically mean that the start-up would dissolve. Though there is a possibility that the start-up entity could move outside of the United States with the entrepreneur as a result of this rule as well. DHS welcomes any public comments on the costs associated with the automatic termination option.
DHS also recognizes that it may be possible that once this rule is final and becomes effective that some spouses already paroled into the United States would be involuntarily separated from their employers. These employers would then face labor turnover costs as a result. While DHS estimates a total of 2,940 spouses of entrepreneurs who may be eligible to apply for parole, DHS cannot predict how many of these spouses and entrepreneurs will apply before this proposed rule would become finalized or how many entrepreneurs and spouses would qualify under other parole provisions and remain in the country. Therefore, DHS does not estimate the number of spouses who may involuntarily be separated or the number of companies that might incur labor turnover costs.
However, DHS can estimate the cost of labor turnover per spouse to employers. DHS has reviewed recent research and literature concerning turnover costs. While there is not an abundance of recently published peer-reviewed research to draw on, there are several dozen studies available which are cited repeatedly across various reports. These studies focus on specific locations and occupations, and measure turnover costs in different ways. A 2012 report published by the Center for American Progress surveyed several dozen studies that considered both direct and indirect costs and determined that turnover costs per employee ranged from 10 to 30 percent of the salary for most salaried workers, and, on average, an employer paid an average of about 20 percent of the worker's salary in total labor turnover costs.
Entrepreneurs who have been approved for parole and have already traveled to the United States may be considered under the non-IE final rule parole framework. These entrepreneurs would be sent a notice of intent to terminate by USCIS. During this time, entrepreneurs may present information to be considered under the non-IE related parole framework. IEs would incur some additional time burden in gathering and submitting information to show they remain eligible for parole. However, DHS anticipates this time burden to be minimal. There may be some additional costs to the government in reconsidering these applications. However, those costs are anticipated to be minimal and covered by the original filing fees. USCIS would incur some costs associated with the creating and mailing of these notices, though DHS also anticipates these costs to be minimal. DHS would not require the IE or dependents to file an additional parole application and therefore, no fees would be charged. Under this option, however, if IEs are approved under the non-IE related parole framework, the IE and their dependents would be required to submit a Form I-765 with the notice of intent to terminate to minimize gaps in employment authorization. Form I-765 includes a filing fee of $410 and a total time burden of 3.42 hours to complete and file the application. Using the weighted mean hourly wage previously established of $34.84, the total cost for entrepreneurs to file Form I-765 is $529 per application.
Under the option to reopen all IE parole adjudications for those IE with approved parole and already in the United States, DHS anticipates minimal costs to IE associated with the burden of providing evidence for parole under the
Finally, the option to allow parole approved under the IE parole program regulations to naturally expire, along with any associated employment authorization, unless otherwise terminated on other grounds would require no additional costs on behalf of the applicant or the government.
For those indviduals who have an approved IE parole application, but have not yet traveled to the United States, automatic termination for these individuals would result in the loss of the costs associated with filing Form I-941 totaling $1,605 per principal application. If the entrepreneur's dependents filed for Form I-131, additional losses of $765 per application would be incurred for parole that could never be realized. If these applications are automatically terminated, these individuals would lose any costs if they attempt to seek parole pursuant to the IE parole program at a port of entry after the effectiveness of this termination. DHS cannot predict how many IEs may fall into this group at this time, but welcomes comments from the public.
For the option of termination of the advance parole document on notice, those IEs who would receive notice and the opportunity to respond would incur some costs in terms of burden associated with providing evidence to demonstrate that parole would otherwise be warranted under the existing non-IE final rule parole framework for the entrepreneur and any dependents of such entrepreneur. Depending on the evidence provided, DHS may terminate or amend the validity period of the advance parole as necessary to align the appropriate timeframe to accomplish the purpose of the parole. If the advance parole document remains approved, individuals could then seek, during the validity of the advance parole document, to be paroled into the United States at a port of entry. Under this option, employment authorization for an entrepreneur would not be automatic; rather, each individual parolee would need to separately apply for employment authorization pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(11) to the extent consistent with the purpose of parole. DHS does not know how many entrepreneurs would fall into this category, however, requests comments from the public on any such data or estimate. As previously established, the costs for entrepreneurs and dependents to submit Form I-765 would be $529 and $446 per application, respectively.
For the option of re-opening IE parole determinations, DHS would reopen all approved Form I-941 parole applications without any additional fees to the applicant. These applicants would lose some of their initial $1,605 application costs associated with the original Form I-941. Some of this loss would be offset by not being required to reapply under the non-IE final rule parole framework which would have costs associated with Form I-131. Addtionally, there may be some time burden to the entrepreneur and dependents of the entrepreneur associated with the opportunity to present evidence that would allow DHS to reconsider the grant of parole under the the non-IE final rule parole framework, rather than the IE parole program regulations. There may be some additional costs to the government in reconsidering these applications. However, those costs are anticipated to be minimal and covered by the original filing fees. Similar to the option to terminate the advance parole document on notice, this option would require each parolee to apply for employment authorization if approved for non-IE final rule parole. DHS does not have information to determine how many individuals might fall into this option and therefore cannot estimate the numbers of IEs. However, the costs for entrepreneurs and dependents to submit Form I-765 would be $529 and $446 per application, respectively. DHS welcomes any public comment on any data or costs not considered under this option.
Finally if an IE is denied under the non-IE final rule parole framework, an entrepreneur whose original application was successfully adjudicated would have spent additional time providing evidence to be considered eligible under the non-IE final rule parole framework. This additional time would vary amongst applicants so DHS does not estimate the time or opportunity costs. Additionally and as discussed earlier, entrepreneurs have to show ownership in the start-up at the time they apply for IE parole. Therefore, even if the IE does not come into the country, they can still remain owners and work for the start-up from outside of the country. It is possible that the start-up could lose additional funding if investors follow the entrepreneur elsewhere or decide not to continue to invest in the start-up entity because of the proposed rescission of parole, however DHS cannot predict the behavior of a start-up entity's current or future investors. DHS welcomes any public comments on the costs associated with entrepreneurs who have approved IE parole applications, but have not yet traveled to the United States.
For individuals with pending parole applications on the effective data of the final rule, under the first option DHS would reject all pending Form I-941 applications for IE parole and return or refund associated fees. These IEs would incur only opportunity costs of time to file applications which would include $405 per application for Form I-941 per entrepreneur, $36 per application for Form I-765 per dependent, or $190 per application for Form I-131 per dependent. The filing fees for each application would be returned or refunded. There may be some administrative costs associated with the issuance of refunds to USCIS. USCIS does not have cost estimates indicating the number of hours required to process and issue these refunds. DHS welcomes any public comments on the impacts of this option.
Under the second option to withdraw pending applications for parole and request a refund for fees, the IE would again incur only costs related to the opportunity costs of time for completing Form I-941, Form I-765, or Form I-131.
The third option is to adjudicate all pending applications received prior to the effective date of the rescission of the IE final rule criteria until all applications are approved or denied. For approved applications, DHS would provide a later effective date for rescission of the final rule and DHS is considering various timeframes for length of parole. This option does not impose any additional costs to applicants other than the original filing costs.
There would be no additional costs for individuals who would no longer be able to seek re-parole after the effective date of this proposed IE parole program rescission. The IE parole program was originally limited to up to 30 months with a possible extension of an additional 30 months. By no longer allowing re-parole, DHS would shorten this timeframe.
Finally, DHS does not know whether some of the startup entities of these entrepreneurs could be considered small entities and could indirectly be impacted by this proposed rule or if some employers who hire the dependents of these entrepreneurs could be small entites and impacted by this proposed rule. Therefore, DHS has prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) under the Regaultory Flexibility Act (RFA) requesting more information on these impacts.
This proposed rule would amend DHS regulations to remove the IE parole program promulgated through the IE Final Rule, 82 FR 5238. In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601(6), DHS examined the impact of this rule on small entities. A small entity may be a small business (defined as any independently owned and operated business not dominant in its field that qualifies as a small business per the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632), a small not-for-profit organization, or a small governmental jurisdiction (locality with fewer than 50,000 people).
In the IE Final Rule, DHS certified that the rule would not impose a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This certification was based on grounds that individual entrepreneurs are not considered small entities under the purview of the RFA. In addition, participation is strictly voluntary for the estimated population of 2,940 annual principal applicants. The IE Final Rule did not require any individuals or businesses, including those created by foreign nationals, to seek parole—either generally or as a specific condition for establishing or operating a business in the United States. While there are numerous costs associated with starting a new business, these various costs would be driven by the business activity that each applicant chooses to endeavor in and not by the rule itself.
Based on public comment feedback to the 2016 proposed rule (81 FR 60130), DHS considered the possibility that a business entity associated with the applicant entrepreneur could pay the parole application fees for these entrepreneurs. However, as DHS explained in the IE Final Rule and reiterates here, while this rule proposes to eliminate the entrepreneur-specific criteria and parole process established by the IE Final Rule, it does not eliminate an
While DHS does not believe that there would be a direct impact to entrepreneurs who are individuals and therefore would not be considered as small entities under the RFA, DHS recognizes that there may be some indirect impacts imposed on small entities that are tied to these entrepreneurs. The RFA does not require indirect impacts to small entities to be considered, nevertheless, DHS has prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) and invites public comment on potential impacts of this proposed removal to small entities.
DHS proposes to remove the IE parole program regulations. As was discussed in the IE Final Rule and in the above sections of this notice, entreprenuers or individuals would be directly impacted by this proposed rule, however, individuals are not small entities and therefore, are not considered for RFA purposes. DHS recognizes that there could be some indirect impacts that this proposed rule may have on small entities that are tied to these entrepreneurs. While DHS does not have to consider indirect impacts for RFA purposes, DHS is including this analysis to determine if the proposed removal would indirectly impact small entities. Additionaly, DHS recognizes that some of the options presented could also impact the entities that hire the spouse of entrepreneurs and welcomes public comment on potential impacts of the proposed changes on small entities.
a. A description of the reasons why the action by the agency is being considered.
DHS is proposing to remove the IE parole program regulations because the policy it promulgated is not the appropriate vehicle for attracting and retaining international entrepreneurs and does not adequately protect U.S. investors and U.S. workers. Part III, Section B of the preamble of this proposed rule more fully describes the reasons for why action is being taken by the agency.
b. A succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis for, the proposed rule.
DHS objectives and legal authority for this proposed rule are discussed in the preamble of this proposed rule.
c. A description and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities to which the proposed changes would apply.
In the Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 sections of this proposed rule and the IE Final Rule, DHS estimated that about 2,940 principal applicants, or entrepreneurs, could be eligible to apply each year. Again, this proposed rule directly impacts individual entrepreneurs, which are not required to be analyzed under the RFA. However, DHS recognizes that some small entities that are tied to the entrepreneur may be indirectly impacted by this proposed rule and therefore provides this
Additionally, DHS recognizes that the options proposed in the preamble may impact some entities that hire the spouses of entrepreneurs, which could be small entities. However, DHS does not have enough information at this time to estimate the number of small entities that may employ the spouses of these entrepreneurs. DHS welcomes public comments or data on the number of small entities that might be impacted by this proposed rule and what the impact might be to those small entities.
d. A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an estimate of the classes of small entities that will be subject to the requirement and the types of professional skills.
The proposed rule does not directly impose any new or additional “reporting” or “recordkeeping” requirements on filers. The proposed rule does not require any new professional skills for reporting.
e. An identification of all relevant Federal rules, to the extent practical, that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule.
DHS is unaware of any duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules, but invites any comment and information regarding any such rules.
f. Description of any significant alternatives to the proposed rule that accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and that minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.
The IE Final Rule requires that applicants attain significant investor capital from qualified U.S. investors. A component of this requirement involves a minmum investment threshold of $250,000. DHS considered several alternatives for this amount, based on public input, in which commenters proposed levels for this minimum ranging from about $100,000 to $1 million. The minimum investment is not itself a size standard to determine whether entities are small. Furthermore, since the rule will involve startups, most would be small by definition, which is a feature of the business startup environment and not specifically the rule itself. Hence, the raising or lowering the minimum from the level established in the IE Final Rule would affect the number of potential applicants that would be eligible at a specific point in time, but DHS does not believe the alternatives would generate a considerable impact to small entities. First, DHS is not aware of evidence that establishes a significant relation between the size of firms over their lifetime and the amount of capital they receive in their seed or startup stage of development. Second, the amount of investment that firms receive at early stages of development reflect perceptions concerning their future success to investors and not their size. Third, DHS does not have evidence to suggest a higher or lower threshold would impact capital costs. DHS determined that changing the level of the threshold still would not address underlying issues over an appropriate vehicle to use in attracting and retaining international entrepreneurs. Therefore, this alternative was not considered any further.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) is intended, among other things, to curb the practice of imposing unfunded Federal mandates on State, local, and tribal governments. Title II of the Act requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule that may result in $100 million or more expenditure (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector. The value equivalent of $100 million in 1995 adjusted for inflation to 2016 levels by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumer (CPI-U) is $157 million.
This rule does not exceed the $100 million expenditure in any one year when adjusted for inflation ($157 million in 2016 dollars), and this rulemaking does not contain such a mandate. The requirements of Title II of the Act, therefore, do not apply, and DHS has not prepared a statement under the Act.
This proposed rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, 804, 110 Stat. 847, 872 (1996), 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This proposed rule has not been found to result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, a major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign-based companies in domestic or export markets.
This rule does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of Executive Order No. 13132, 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999), this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement.
This rule meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No.12988, 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 5, 1996).
DHS Directive (Dir) 023-01 Rev. 01 establishes the procedures that DHS and its components use to comply with NEPA and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing NEPA. 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508.
DHS analyzed this action and concludes that it is not a NEPA-triggering action. Removing a rule that was determined not to individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment accordingly has no impact on the human environment. If the rule was believed to have a significant impact an Environmental Impact Statement would have been prepared. If the rule was believed to have significant effects that were to be mitigated to insignificance, an Environmental Assessment would have been conducted and a Finding of No Significant Impact with mitigating measures would have been issued. If the rule had been found to have no significant effects because it is covered
Furthermore, unlike the rescission of policy letters or other actions which do not involve rulemaking, public involvement, an important value of NEPA, is fully protected by the rulemaking process.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, all agencies are required to submit any reporting requirements inherent in a rule to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
DHS is withdrawing all changes to the Form I-131 and Form I-765 approved with the IE Final Rule published at 82 FR 5238 on January 17, 2017. DHS will continue to use the version of Form I-765 approved by OMB on April 13, 2017, and will continue to use the version of Form I-131 approved on December 21, 2016. DHS also is proposing to discontinue the new information collection Form I-941 originally approved as a result of the Final Rule published at 82 FR 5238 on January 17, 2017. Finally, DHS is withdrawing all changes to the Form I-9 that were approved in connection with the IE Final Rule.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(1)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
DHS is discontinuing the new USCIS Form I-941 (OMB Control Number 1615-0136).
Administrative practice and procedure, Authority delegations (Government agencies), Freedom of information, Immigration, Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Immigration, Passports and visas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Employment, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, DHS is proposing to amend chapter I of title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a; 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1304, 1356, 1365b; 31 U.S.C. 9701; Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (6 U.S.C. 1
6 U.S.C. 202(4) and 271, 8 U.S.C. 1101 and note, 1102, 1103, 1182 and note, 1184, 1187, 1223, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1255, 1359; 8 U.S.C. 1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458); 8 CFR part 2.
8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1324a; 48 U.S.C. 1806; 8 CFR part 2; Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 890, as amended by Pub. L. 114-74, 129 Stat. 599.
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(v) * * *
(A) * * *
(
The revisions read as follows:
(b)
(c) * * *
(11) An alien paroled into the United States temporarily for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit pursuant to section 212(d)(5) of the Act.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Model A330-200 Freighter series airplanes, Airbus Model A330-200 and -300 series airplanes, and Airbus Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of cracked slat tracks at the location of the front stop attachment to the track. This proposed AD would require a detailed inspection, repetitive special detailed inspections, and corrective actions if necessary. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 13, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax: +33 5 61 93 45 80; email:
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax: 206-231-3229.
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2017-0060, dated April 7, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A330-200 Freighter series airplanes; Airbus Model A330-200 and -300 series airplanes; and Airbus Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes. The MCAI states:
Several cases of cracked slat tracks at the location of front stop attachment to track have been reported by operators. Analysis of the affected slat tracks (Airbus pre-modification (mod) 45967 design) revealed that induced torque loads during normal installation of the front stop, in combination with an incorrect shaft length of the attachment bolts and geometry of the front stop, are the root cause.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, would affect the structural integrity of the slat surface, which could lead to detachment of an outer or inner slat surface, possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane and/or injury to persons on the ground.
To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued Service Bulletin (SB) A330-57-3123 and SB A340-57-4130, to provide inspection instructions.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-time detailed inspection (DET) of the front stop lateral and aft surfaces [for marks (dents or scratches),] and repetitive special detailed inspections (SDI) of the front stop attachment areas, of slat tracks number (No.) 5 to No. 16 inclusive, both left hand (LH) and right hand (RH) wings [for cracks], and, depending on findings, accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s) [corrective actions include rework, repair, and slat rigging].
This [EASA] AD also includes reference to an optional modification (Airbus mod 205378) of the affected slat tracks, for which the associated SBs (SB A330-57-3126 and SB A340-57-4133, as applicable) are expected to become available in July 2017, which constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by this [EASA] AD.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017; and Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017. This service information describes procedures for a detailed inspection of the front stop lateral and aft surfaces for marks (dents or scratches), repetitive special detailed inspections of the front stop attachment areas, of slat track numbers 5 to 16 inclusive, both LH and RH wings for cracks, and corrective actions. These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models.
Airbus has also issued Service Bulletin A330-57-3126, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated December 21, 2017; and Service Bulletin A340-57-4133, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated December 21, 2017. This service information describes procedures for modification of all affected slat tracks on an airplane. These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models.
This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of these same type designs.
Although the MCAI specifies to continue repetitive inspections if certain cracks that do not exceed specified damage limits are found, this proposed AD would require repairing before further flight in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017; Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017; or obtaining corrective action instructions approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA), and accomplishing them within the compliance time specified therein.
Although the MCAI specifies accomplishing the proposed actions in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, dated June 14, 2016, or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, dated June 14, 2016, this proposed AD would require using Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017, or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017. For airplanes on which the actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, dated June 14, 2016, or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, dated June 14, 2016, have been done, this proposed AD provides credit for those actions provided that the additional work identified in Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017, or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017, is done. The additional work
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 101 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control number for the collection of information required by this NPRM is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost associated with this NPRM has been detailed in the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with this NPRM is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
We must receive comments by July 13, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), (c)(4), and (c)(5) of this AD, certificated in any category, all certificated models, all manufacturer serial numbers.
(1) Airbus Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes.
(2) Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, and -243 airplanes.
(3) Airbus Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes.
(4) Airbus Model A340-211, -212, -213 airplanes.
(5) Airbus Model A340-311, -312, and -313 airplanes.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.
This AD was prompted by reports of cracked slat tracks at the location of the front stop attachment to the track. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracked slat tracks which could affect the structural
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(1) For the purpose of this AD, “affected slat track” is defined as a pre-modification 45967 slat track, located at the wing positions as indicated in figure 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, and having a part number specified in figure 2 to paragraph (g) of this AD. In case the part number identification (ID) plate is missing or cannot be read, the slat track can be identified by the ink marking. If the operator cannot determine the part number, then that airplane is in Group 1.
(2) For the purpose of this AD: Group 1 airplanes are those that, on the effective date of this AD, have an affected slat track installed. Group 2 airplanes are those that, on the effective date of this AD, do not have any affected slat track installed.
For Group 1 airplanes: At the applicable times specified in figure 3 to paragraph (h) of this AD, do a detailed inspection of the front stop lateral and aft surfaces, and do a special detailed inspection of the front stop attachment areas of each affected slat track, both right hand (RH) and left hand (LH) wings, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017; as applicable. Thereafter, repeat the special detailed
(1) If, during any special detailed inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, any crack is detected at the front stop attachment area of an affected slat track: Before further flight, obtain corrective action instructions approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA), and accomplish them within the compliance time specified therein. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
(2) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, marks (dents or scratches) are found on the front stop lateral or aft surfaces of an affected slat track; provided that no crack is detected; before further flight, rework the affected lateral front stop surface of that slat track, and accomplish slat rigging, as applicable, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017. Accomplishment of rework or slat rigging on an airplane, as required by this paragraph, does not constitute terminating action for the repetitive special detailed inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD.
(3) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, marks (dents or scratches) are found on the front stop lateral or aft surfaces of an affected slat track, and any crack is detected at the front stop attachment area of that slat track: Before further flight, obtain corrective action instructions approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA, and accomplish them within the compliance time specified therein. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
At the applicable time specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD: Report the results of the inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD to Airbus Service Bulletin Reporting Online Application on Airbus World (
(1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 60 days after each inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD.
(2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 60 days after the effective date of this AD.
(1) Replacement of an affected slat track at any position with a post-modification 45967 slat track, if accomplished as part of the corrective actions specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(3) of this AD, terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD, for that slat track position.
(2) Modification of all affected slat tracks on an airplane in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3126, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated December 21, 2017; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4133, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated December 21, 2017; as applicable, terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD for that airplane, provided that, prior to modification, the affected slat tracks pass an inspection (crack free) in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, Revision 01,
(1) Except as specified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD: For Group 1 airplanes, after the effective date of this AD, an affected slat track may be installed, provided the installation is accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
(2) After modification of a Group 1 airplane as specified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD, no person may install an affected slat track on that airplane.
(3) For Group 2 airplanes: As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install an affected slat track on any Group 2 airplane.
This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, dated June 14, 2016, or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, dated June 14, 2016, provided that within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, the additional work identified in Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017, or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017, as applicable, has been completed in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3123, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017, or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4130, Revision 01, including Appendixes 02 and 03, dated September 27, 2017, as applicable.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2017-0060, dated April 7, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax: 206 231 3229.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax: +33 5 61 93 45 80; email:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The Boeing Company Model 727C, 727-100, 727-100C, 727-200, and 727-200F series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by the results of a fleet survey, which revealed cracking in bulkhead frame webs at a certain body station. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of the bulkhead frame web at a certain body station and applicable on-condition actions. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 13, 2018.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5232; fax: 562-627-5210; email:
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
We have received a report indicating that the results of a fleet survey of retired 737 airplanes revealed cracking in the bulkhead frame web at the upper lobe of the station (STA) 259.5 bulkhead frame webs. Two web cracks, measuring 0.45 inch and 1.7 inches, were found at the outer chord fastener locations between stringer (S)-11R and S-12R. A subsequent review of fleet data sources revealed additional crack findings on other 737 airplanes in the left and right side frame webs between S-11 and S-12. Fleet findings have been reported on a total of 5 airplanes with a range of between 60,640 and 73,655 total flight cycles. Such cracking may lead to subsequent failure of the skin and cockpit window surround structure, and could result in rapid decompression. No cracks have been reported on Model 727 airplanes but Model 727 and Model 737 airplanes have a similar frame installation at STA 259.5.
We reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 727-53A0235 RB, dated October 12, 2017. The service information describes procedures for repetitive high frequency eddy current inspections and low frequency eddy current inspections for cracks of the STA 259.5 bulkhead frame web from the first stiffener above S-10 to S-13, on the left and right sides of the airplane, and applicable on-condition actions. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions identified in the Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 727-53A0235 RB, dated October 12, 2017, described previously, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service information at
The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the Airworthiness Directives Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (AD ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement is a process for annotating which steps in the service information are “required for compliance” (RC) with an AD. Boeing has implemented this RC concept into Boeing service bulletins.
In an effort to further improve the quality of ADs and AD-related Boeing service information, a joint process improvement initiative was worked between the FAA and Boeing. The initiative resulted in the development of a new process in which the service information more clearly identifies the actions needed to address the unsafe condition in the “Accomplishment Instructions.” The new process results in a Boeing Requirements Bulletin, which contains only the actions needed to address the unsafe condition (
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 106 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight Division.
We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
We must receive comments by July 13, 2018.
None.
This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 727C, 727-100, 727-100C, 727-200, and 727-200F series airplanes, certificated in any category.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
This AD was prompted by the results of a fleet survey which revealed cracking in bulkhead frame webs at a certain body station. We are issuing this AD to address cracking in the station 259.5 bulkhead frame web from the first stiffener above stringer S-10 to S-13. Such cracking may lead to subsequent failure of the skin and cockpit window surround structure, and could result in rapid decompression.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the applicable times specified in the “Compliance” paragraph of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 727-53A0235 RB, dated October 12, 2017, do all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 727-53A0235 RB, dated October 12, 2017.
Guidance for accomplishing the actions required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 727-53A0235, dated October 12, 2017, which is referred to in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 727-53A0235 RB, dated October 12, 2017.
(1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of this AD: Where Boeing Alert Requirements Service Bulletin 727-53A0235 RB, dated October 12, 2017, uses the phrase “the original issue date of Requirements Bulletin 727-53A0235 RB,” this AD requires using “the effective date of this AD.”
(2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 727-53A0235 RB, dated October 12, 2017, specifies contacting Boeing, this AD requires repair using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
Special flight permits, as described in Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199), may be issued to operate the airplane to a location where the requirements of this AD can be accomplished, but concurrence by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, is required before issuance of the special flight permit.
(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(1) For more information about this AD, contact George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5232; fax: 562-627-5210; email:
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; internet
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
This action proposes to modify two VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal airways (V-97 and V-422) in the vicinity of the Chicago, IL. The FAA is proposing this action due to the planned decommissioning of the Chicago O'Hare, IL, VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) navigation aid (NAVAID), which provides navigation guidance for portions of the affected Air Traffic Service (ATS) routes. The Chicago O'Hare VOR/DME is being decommissioned to facilitate the construction of a new runway at Chicago O'Hare International Airport.
Comments must be received on or before July 13, 2018.
Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1 (800) 647-5527, or (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0464; Airspace Docket No. 18-AGL-12 at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at
FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.
Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend the route structure in the Chicago, IL, area as necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace System.
Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0464; Airspace Docket No. 18-AGL-12) and be submitted in triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2018-0464; Airspace Docket No. 18-AGL-12.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
All communications received on or before the specified comment closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of comments received. All comments submitted will be available for examination in the public docket both before and after the comment closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the internet at
You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see
This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed in the
The FAA is planning to decommission the Chicago O'Hare, IL, VOR/DME in January 2019 in support of construction activities for a new runway at Chicago O'Hare International Airport.
With the planned decommissioning of the Chicago O'Hare VOR/DME, the NAVAID radial used to define the BEBEE fix, located southeast of Chicago O'Hare International Airport, would no longer be available; thus, making the fix unusable. In lieu of redefining the BEBEE fix with another NAVAID remaining in the area, the FAA is proposing to remove the 2 nautical mile airway segment between the BEBEE and
The airway segment between the BEBEE and NILES fixes overlays V-7, so removal of the airway segment from V-97 and V-422 would be mitigated by V-7 remaining unchanged and appear transparent to instrument flight rules traffic navigating through the area. Similarly, visual flight rules pilots who elect to navigate via the airways through the affected area would be unaffected and able to continue using V-7 in the area.
Additionally, the KRENA fix, located northwest of Chicago O'Hare International Airport, is defined in the V-97 description as the intersection of the Northbrook, IL, VOR/DME 291° and Janesville, WI, VOR/DME 112° radials, which is virtually a straight line. The FAA proposes to redefine the fix in its current location using radials from the DuPage, IL, VOR/DME and Janesville, WI, VOR/DME NAVAIDs to better define the fix using intersecting radials.
The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to modify the descriptions of VOR Federal airways V-97 and V-422. The planned decommissioning of the Chicago O'Hare, IL, VOR/DME has made these actions necessary. The proposed VOR Federal airway changes are described below.
All radials in the route descriptions below that are unchanged are stated in True degrees. Radials that are stated in True and Magnetic degrees are new computations based on available NAVAIDS.
Lastly, a minor editorial correction would be made to the V-97 airway description to correct the state abbreviation for the Cincinnati, KY, VORTAC. The “Cincinnati, OH” airway point listed would be changed to “Cincinnati, KY”.
VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Order 7400.11B dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15, 2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR Federal airways listed in this document would be subsequently published in the Order.
The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
From Dolphin, FL; La Belle, FL; St. Petersburg, FL; Seminole, FL; Pecan, GA; Atlanta, GA; INT Atlanta 001° and Volunteer, TN, 197° radials; Volunteer; London, KY; Lexington, KY; Cincinnati, KY; Shelbyville, IN; INT Shelbyville 313° and Boiler, IN, 136° radials; Boiler; Chicago Heights, IL; to INT Chicago Heights 358°(T)/356°(M) and DuPage, IL, 101°(T)/099°(M) radials. From INT DuPage, IL, 347°(T)/345°(M) and Janesville, WI, 112°(T)/109°(M) radials; Janesville; Lone Rock, WI; Nodine, MN; to Gopher, MN. The airspace below 2,000 feet MSL outside the United States is excluded.
From INT DuPage, IL, 101°(T)/099°(M) and Chicago Heights, IL, 358°(T)/356°(M) radials; Chicago Heights; INT Chicago Heights 117° and Knox, IN, 276° radials; Knox; Webster Lake, IN; INT Webster Lake 097° and Flag City, OH, 289° radials; to Flag City.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
Proposed Policy; Request for Comments.
This notice announces a proposed update of the FAA policy regarding approval of the temporary closure of a federally obligated airport for a nonaeronautical purpose. Under Federal law, an airport operator that has accepted Federal grants is obligated to maintain the airport for public aviation use. In a limited exception to the general requirement, an airport operator may temporarily close the airport or part of the airport for a nonaeronautical event, if the FAA approves that closure in advance. The FAA proposes to adopt this policy statement to provide additional guidance to airport operators describing the process and criteria for evaluating airport closure requests, and the required contents of an airport operator's request for approval. The FAA is seeking comments on the proposed statement of policy.
Send your comments on or before July 30, 2018.
You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2018-0432 using any of the following methods:
For more information, see the
Lorraine Herson-Jones, Manager, Airport Compliance Division, ACO-100, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-3085; facsimile: (202) 267-4629.
You can get an electronic copy of this Policy and all other documents in this docket using the internet by:
(1) Searching the Federal eRulemaking portal (
(2) Visiting FAA's Regulations and Policies web page at (
(3) Accessing the Government Printing Office's web page at (
You can also get a copy by sending a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Airport Compliance and Management Analysis, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-3085. Make sure to identify the docket number, notice number, or amendment number of this proceeding.
This notice is published under the authority described in Title 49 of the United States Code, Subtitle VII, part B, chapter 471, section 47122(a).
Airport sponsors that have accepted grants under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) have agreed to comply with certain Federal policies included in each AIP grant agreement as sponsor assurances. The Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 (AAIA) (Pub. L. 97-248), as amended and recodified at 49 U.S.C., § 47107(a)(1), and the contractual sponsor assurances require that the airport sponsor make the airport available for aviation use. Title 49 U.S.C., § 47107(a)(8) requires grant agreements to include an assurance that “a proposal to close the airport temporarily for a nonaeronautical purpose must first be approved by the Secretary [of Transportation].” This requirement is implemented by Grant assurance 19,
Each year sponsors of federally obligated airports request temporary closure of a ramp, taxiway, runway or an entire airport for a nonaeronautical event, typically for a period of one to three days. Any such request must be approved by the FAA in advance before the event can take place. While the FAA offices generally applied a consistent set of criteria to the evaluation of requests for temporary closure, the agency has not provided uniform guidance for sponsors on the process to apply for a temporary closure. The FAA believes that a detailed description of the contents of an application for temporary closure of airport facilities, and a clear listing of the obligations of an airport sponsor before, during and after a closure, will benefit both to airport sponsors and to the FAA offices handling applications.
Conducting an event on airport property is a complex undertaking. Whether the purpose is an aeronautical event (
The FAA affirms in this Notice that federally assisted airports should remain open for aviation use. Where an airport sponsor does request a temporary closure of airport facilities for a nonaeronautical event, this Notice describes the required contents of a request, and the criteria for FAA's approval.
The proposed policy statement provides a standard application process for approval of nonaeronautical events at a federally obligated airport, and a detailed explanation of the measures an airport sponsor will need to take in order to protect the airport and comply with the terms of the FAA grant agreements. In summary:
• As a first step, the airport sponsor should arrange a meeting with the local FAA office to discuss their plans for the event.
• Applications for temporary closure must be submitted to the FAA in writing in advance, with a complete explanation and justification for the event.
• The greater the degree of impact on aeronautical use, the greater the justification required for closure and the greater the need for mitigation of impacts on airport operations, facilities and resources.
• Mitigation measures to ensure safety and preservation of airport assets include:
○ Timely notice to tenants and to itinerant operators through NOTAMs;
○ Development of a `Safety Plan' to include notice to airport tenants and users, special markings, airport security, and provisions for crowd control and separation from operations;
○ Filing of a Form 7460 when necessary to allow the FAA review of any temporary structures or other elements that may impact the National Airspace System (NAS);
○ Receipt of fair market value compensation for use of airport facilities; and
○ Restoration of all airport facilities to the condition prior to the event at the event proponent's expense.
• The FAA will review applications for justification, adequate safety mitigation, full reimbursement of airport expenses, and protection and restoration of airport facilities.
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to adopt the following statement of policy on its statutory responsibility to review and approve or disapprove requests for temporary closure of federally obligated airport facilities for a nonaeronautical airport event.
To implement the requirements of 49 U.S.C., § 47107(a)(8) and AIP Grant Assurance 19, the FAA will use the following procedures and criteria to evaluate and approve requests for the temporary closure of a federally obligated airport for a nonaeronautical event.
1. Make no permanent change in airport facilities as depicted on the Airport Layout Plan;
2. Maintain the safety, efficiency, and utility of the airport consistent with the limited authority of the FAA to grant a temporary closure for a nonaeronautical event;
3. Provide timely notice to tenants and itinerant aircraft operators of the planned event and the effect on the availability of airport facilities;
4. Receive fair market value for all nonaeronautical use of airport property;
5. Use of airport property for nonaeronautical activities at less than fair market value is limited to community use as defined in section VII.D of the Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue (Revenue Use Policy);
6. Provide benefits to the airport that outweigh the temporary impact on aviation use;
7. Ensure that airport revenue, personnel and equipment are not used to subsidize non-airport activities;
8. Ensure compliance with operational safety, certification and security regulations, protection of airspace, and maintenance of the FAA design and safety standards during aircraft operations; and
9. Ensure that the sponsor does not surrender its rights and powers at any time before, during, or after the event.
1. Where an event would require that aircraft operations be suspended during the event, a proposal must identify why closure of the airport is necessary, and how the proposed nonaeronautical use justifies loss of the use of the airport for the duration of the event. The proposal must include a Safety Plan that describes how based and itinerant aircraft operators will be advised of the closure.
2. Where an event would use aeronautical facilities but not require total suspension of aircraft operations, the Safety Plan must include measures to assure that the temporary changes in available facilities do not affect the safety of concurrent operations.
3. In all cases, an application for temporary closure must identify measures for maintaining separation between public event areas and aircraft operating areas.
4. Documentation must demonstrate that the event was coordinated with air carriers, Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT), aeronautical tenants and users serving the airport as applicable. Documentation must show that concerns have been properly addressed.
5. Identify other airports in the area that could accommodate diverted traffic during the closure.
6. Regional Airports Division (Region) or Airports District Office (ADO) should coordinate with the appropriate FAA regional Lines of Business. Most events trigger notification requirements as per the current version of FAA Order 7400.2, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters, which requires internal coordination through the Obstruction Evaluation/Airport Airspace Analysis (OE/AAA) system. When events have been circulated through the OE/AAA, the non-rulemaking airports (NRA) case number should be included in the agency approval/disapproval letter.
7. When the nonaeronautical event is at an airport with air carrier service, the sponsor must coordinate with the Transportation Security Administration.
1. For a proposed closure of the airport to operations or a closure of any part of the airfield movement area or proposed obstructions to movement area associated safety clearances, the sponsor must prepare a Safety Plan to include at least the following items:
a. Special markings for the event, and removal and restoration of markings after the event.
b. Notice to tenants and airmen, including appropriate NOTAMs.
c. Inspection and repair of any damage to airport property.
d. Reporting and marking of any structures affecting protected zones or surfaces.
e. Safe separation between aircraft operations and the public. These may include: special taxi routes, access to terminal gates, crowd control, vehicular routes, staging areas, and others.
f. Sponsor's determination and analysis that there is no adverse effect on the airport's approved security plan.
g. Where necessary to maintain the safety, security and efficiency of airport operations, Regions or ADOs should use applicable elements from the AC 150/5370-2, Operational Safety on Airports During Construction.
2. The airport sponsor must provide timely advance notice of the nonaeronautical event to pilots and airport tenants, and to the ATC tower if applicable. The sponsor must issue appropriate NOTAMs to advise itinerant pilots of any limited availability of the airport during the event. The sponsor must provide advance notice to airport businesses and other tenants of any effect on use of airport property during the event.
3. Filing of a Form 7460 may be necessary to obtain FAA review of any temporary structures on the airport and use of airport property. The Form 7460 can be filed prior to or with the application for approval of closure, but must be filed no later than 120 days prior to the event to allow time for the FAA to review, comment and response from proponent.
1. The airport must recover fair market value (FMV) payment for the nonaeronautical use of airport property to the extent required by the Revenue Use Policy.
2. The airport sponsor must receive full compensation for the time of airport personnel and the use of airport resources for the event (
3. Airport funds and resources may not be used to subsidize the event, except insofar as the event will be staged by the airport sponsor itself. Use of airport property for a nonaeronautical purpose at below fair market value payment is considered a subsidy.
4. The airport sponsor's agreement with the event promoter should contain the event promoter's binding written agreement to indemnify and hold harmless the airport sponsor for any damages, liabilities or judgments against the airport sponsor relating to the use of the airport for the event.
1. The airport sponsor should assess the condition of airfield facilities and airport property in the event areas before the event, and have the event proponent acknowledge that condition in writing.
2. The airport sponsor's agreement with the event sponsor must include the event proponent's binding written agreement to restore airport property to its pre-event condition and repair all damage to airport facilities resulting from the event. All repairs and restoration of property must be completed at the expense of the event proponent in a timely manner and in conformance with FAA standards.
3. The event areas should be re-inspected following the event to assure that they have been restored to the preexisting condition.
To apply for temporary airport closure for a nonaeronautical purpose, an airport sponsor must submit a proposal to the Region or ADO for analysis and approval. In Block Grant states the proposal may be submitted to the State Block Grant Agency with a copy to the Region or ADO. The airport sponsor must submit sufficient information and assurances to indicate that each requirement has been or will be satisfied.
The airport sponsor requesting a temporary airport closure must submit the information below to the Region and or ADO or State Block Grant Agency to request approval of the temporary closure:
1. The dates of the proposed closure periods including any necessary set up and take down period. Identify whether this is an annual or one-time event.
2. An estimation of the number of operations (commercial, general aviation, military) to be impacted and how this number was determined.
3. An event map depicting:
a. Where and how the airport property will be used for the nonaeronautical activity (
b. Areas used for the event that have been developed or improved with Federal funds (identify the grant number and anticipated impact to the Federal investment).
c. Impacted Navigational Aids (NAVAIDs).
d. Location and description of elements
e. Structures or other elements that may require a form 7460 application.
4. Procedures and equipment to delineate closed areas (
5. A Safety Plan.
6. If applicable, a description of the mutual aid fire and rescue agreements and whether there needs to be a presence of mutual aid safety services during the event.
7. Plan to assess the airport property prior to re-opening for aeronautical uses to identify and fix:
a. Damage.
b. Temporary markings HAZMAT issues (if applicable).
c. Conduct Foreign Object Debris (FOD) sweep.
8. Identification of the party who will be responsible for funding any repairs and a timeframe within which the repairs will be made.
9. Indicate impacts to NAVAIDs and procedures for taking these out and in service.
10. Draft of the NOTAM(s) to be issued for the event.
11. Certification of Notification to Stakeholders—at a minimum the following entities must be notified of the event and provided an opportunity to give feedback. The sponsor should address concerns from stakeholders and include comments and responses in the proposal, including mitigation where
a. Tenants, FBOs, airlines, and local users (
b. Air traffic control tower.
c. Local aviation organizations.
d. Airport security and local law enforcement agencies.
e. Flight Standards District Office.
12. An explanation of how the event benefits the airport and is compliant with the FAA Policy on Revenue Use.
a. For an event proposed by a commercial/for-profit party:
i. Financial benefits must be equal to at least the fair market value of the subject property use.
ii. In-kind services or benefits must be equivalent to FMV compensation.
iii. Airport revenue cannot be used toward conducting the event (
iv. The event should also generate intangible benefits for the airport such as community goodwill and community interest.
b. For an event organized by a non-profit/charitable organization or by the airport sponsor itself on its own behalf. In all non-profit nonaeronautical cases there needs to be a benefit to the airport that clearly outweighs the loss or displacement of aeronautical activities. Examples of benefits to the airport may include:
i. Advertising for the airport included in the event advertising at no cost to the airport.
ii. A percentage of ticket sales paid to the airport.
iii. Intangible benefits (
c. For events proposed by a party other than the airport sponsor, the event proponent should assume the costs of the event,
13. Approval of the closure of airport facilities for a nonaeronautical event is a Federal action that requires environmental review.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone for certain navigable waters of the Cooper River in North Charleston, SC. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of the general public, spectators, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards during a fireworks display. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston (COTP) or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 28, 2018.
You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2018-0171 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Justin Heck, Sector Charleston Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone (843) 740-3184, email
On February 23, 2018, the City of North Charleston notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting a fireworks display from 10 p.m. to 11 p.m. on July 4, 2018. The fireworks are to be launched from a barge along the bank of the Cooper River at River Front Park in North Charleston, SC. Hazards from firework displays include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris. The Captain of the Port Charleston (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the fireworks to be used in this display would be a safety concern for anyone within a 500-yard radius of the barge.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels and the navigable waters within a 500-yard radius of the fireworks barge before, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.
The COTP proposes to establish a safety zone from 9:45 p.m. to 11:15 p.m. on July 4, 2018. The safety zone would cover all navigable waters within 500 yards of the fireworks barge located at River Front Park on the Cooper River in North Charleston, SC. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled 10 p.m. to 11 p.m. fireworks display. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document. The Coast Guard would provide notice of the safety zone by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives.
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been designated a “significant
This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. The safety zone will only be enforced for an hour and a half, and although persons and vessels may not enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the safety zone without authorization from the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, vessel traffic would be able to safely operate in the surrounding area during the enforcement period and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone. Moreover, the Coast Guard will provide advance notification of the safety zone to the local maritime community by Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
We have considered the impact of this proposed rule on small entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owner or operators of vessels intending to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area during the enforcement period. For the reasons stated in section IV.A. above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the
This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety zone lasting an hour and a half that would prohibit entry within 500 yards of a barge from which fireworks will be launched. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L 60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.
(2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at 843-740-7050, or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area is granted by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.
(3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives.
(d)
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone for certain waters of the Willamette River near Lake Oswego, OR. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters during a fireworks display on July 4, 2018. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Columbia River or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.
Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 13, 2018.
You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2018-0380 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email LCDR Laura Springer, Waterways Management Division, Marine Safety Unit Portland, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 503-240-9319, email
On April 17, 2018, the City of Lake Oswego notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting a fireworks display from 10 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. on July 4, 2018, to commemorate Independence Day. The fireworks will launch from a barge in the Willamette River approximately 150 yards east of George Rodgers Park in Lake Oswego, OR. Hazards from firework displays include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris. The Captain of the Port Columbia River has determined that potential hazards associated with the fireworks in this display are a safety concern for anyone within a 450-yard radius of the barge.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels and the navigable waters within a 450-yard radius of the fireworks barge before, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.
The Captain of the Port Columbia River proposes to establish a safety zone from 9 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. on July 4, 2018. The safety zone would cover all navigable waters of the Willamette River within 450-yards of a barge located at 45°24′37.46″ N, 122°39′29.70″ W, in vicinity of George Rogers Park in Lake Oswego, OR. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled 10 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. fireworks display. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic would be able to safely transit around this safety zone which would impact a small designated area of the Willamette River for approximately two hours during the evening when vessel traffic is normally low. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the
This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety zone lasting less than two and a half hours that would prohibit entry within 450-yards of a fireworks barge. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Commission is noticing a recent filing requesting that the Commission initiate an informal rulemaking proceeding to consider changes to an analytical method for use in periodic reporting (Proposal One). This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.
Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.
On May 17, 2018, the Postal Service filed a petition pursuant to 39 CFR 3050.11 requesting that the Commission initiate a rulemaking proceeding to consider changes to analytical principles relating to periodic reports and compliance determinations.
The Origin-Destination Information System—Revenue, Pieces, and Weight (ODIS-RPW) used to estimate volume and revenue is also a probability-based destinating mail sampling system in which data collectors also record mail characteristics from sampled mailpieces.
Proposal One would allow utilization of the same digital data (regarding DPS pieces destined for delivery by rural routes) currently employed by ODIS-RPW to simultaneously enhance the RCCS estimation of delivered DPS volumes and eliminate the need to manually sample a large portion of DPS mail. Petition, Proposal One at 2. Details about the mapping of products to mailcodes are set forth in the RCCS Digital Mailcode Flowchart Excel file electronically attached to the Petition. The RCCS Digital System documentation electronically attached to Proposal One as a PDF document provides more details on the proposed
The automated, systematic method of collecting images of DPS letter and cards used to collect the sample would reduce the risk of undetected sampling errors, and the retention of the mailpiece images for 30 days would permit review and post-analysis by data collectors and supervisors.
The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2018-4 for consideration of matters raised by the Petition. More information on the Petition may be accessed via the Commission's website at
1. The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2018-4 for consideration of the matters raised by the Petition of the United States Postal Service for the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposal One), filed May 17, 2018.
2. Comments by interested persons in this proceeding are due no later than June 13, 2018.
3. Reply comments are due no later than June 20, 2018.
4. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission appoints Lawrence Fenster to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in this docket.
5. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the
By the Commission.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Proposed rule.
Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of elements of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) nonattainment area (HGB area). Specifically, EPA is proposing approval of the attainment demonstration, a reasonably available control measures (RACM) analysis, the contingency measures plan in the event of failure to attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date, and Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs) for 2017, which is the attainment year for the area. EPA is also notifying the public of the status of EPA's adequacy determination for these MVEBs for the HGB area.
Written comments must be received on or before June 28, 2018.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0053, at
Carl Young, 214-665-6645,
Throughout this document wherever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean the EPA.
Ground-level ozone is an air pollutant that is formed from the reactions of nitrogen oxides (NO
On December 23, 2014, the D.C. Circuit Court issued a decision rejecting, among other things, our attainment deadlines for the 2008 ozone nonattainment areas, finding that we did not have statutory authority under the CAA to extend those deadlines to the end of the calendar year.
When we reclassified the HGB area, we also identified the SIP requirements for the area. The requirements being addressed in this notice are: (1) Modeling and an attainment demonstration (40 CFR 51.1108), (2) RACM (40 CFR 51.1112), (3) a contingency measures plan in the event of failure to attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date (CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9)), and (4) attainment MVEBs for 2017, which is the attainment year for the HGB area (40 CFR 93.118(b)).
For areas classified as Moderate and above, CAA section 182(b)(1)(A) requires a SIP revision that provides for VOC and NO
We previously approved SIP revisions addressing the following requirements for the HGB area: (1) Emissions inventory (80 FR 9204, February 20, 2015) and (2) confirmation of provisions addressing emissions statements from facilities, new source review emission offsets and a basic vehicle inspection and maintenance program (82 FR 22291, May 15, 2017). In a separate action we are proposing to approve the HGB area reasonable further progress (RFP) demonstration and RFP milestone failure contingency measures plan (83 FR 17964, April 25, 2018). We plan to address the HGB area's reasonable available control technology demonstration in a separate action.
On December 29, 2016, Texas submitted a SIP revision for the HGB area. The SIP revision included a description of how CAA requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the HGB area are met for: (1) Modeling and attainment demonstration, (2) RACM, (3) a contingency plan and (4) MVEBs. A copy of the SIP revision is available on line at
We have prepared technical support documents (TSDs) for this rulemaking which detail our evaluation. Our TSDs may be accessed online at
EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.1108(c) specifically require that areas classified as moderate and above submit a modeled attainment demonstration based on a photochemical grid modeling evaluation or any other analytical method determined by the Administrator to be at least as effective as photochemical modeling. Section 51.1108(c) also requires each attainment demonstration to be consistent with the provisions of section 51.112, including Appendix W to 40 CFR part 51 (
As with any predictive tool, there are inherent uncertainties associated with photochemical modeling. EPA's guidance recognizes these limitations and provides approaches for considering other analytical evidence to help assess whether attainment of the NAAQS is demonstrated. This process is called a WOE determination. EPA's modeling guidance (updated in 1996, 1999, and 2002) discusses various WOE approaches. EPA's modeling guidance has been further updated in 2005, 2007 and in addition a draft in 2014 was issued for the 2008 8-hour ozone attainment demonstration procedures. EPA guidance has consistently recommended that all attainment demonstrations include supplemental analyses, WOE, in addition to the recommended modeling. These supplemental analyses would provide additional information such as data analyses, and emissions and air quality trends, which would help strengthen the overall conclusion drawn from the photochemical modeling. EPA's Guidance for 1997 8-hour ozone SIPs was that a WOE analysis is specifically recommended to be included as part of any attainment demonstration SIP where the modeling results predict Future Design Values (FDVs)
TCEQ submitted the HGB attainment demonstration SIP with photochemical modeling and a WOE analyses on December 29, 2016. The results of the photochemical modeling and WOE analyses are discussed below.
Photochemical grid models are the state-of-the-art method for predicting the effectiveness of control strategies in reducing ozone levels. The models use a three-dimensional grid to represent conditions in the area of interest. TCEQ chose to use the Comprehensive Air Model with Extensions (CAMx), Version 6.31 photochemical model for this attainment demonstration SIP. The model is based on well-established treatments of advection, diffusion, deposition, and chemistry. TCEQ has used the CAMx model in other SIPs and EPA has approved many SIPs using CAMx based modeling analyses. 40 CFR part 51 Appendix W indicates that photochemical grid models should be used for ozone SIPs and lists a number of factors to be considered in selecting a photochemical grid model to utilize. EPA has reviewed the TCEQ's reasons for selecting CAMx and EPA agrees with the choice by TCEQ to utilize CAMx for this SIP.
In this case, TCEQ has developed a modeling grid system that consists of three nested grids. The outer grid stretches from west of California to east of Maine and parts of the Atlantic Ocean to the east, and from parts of southern Canada in the north to much of Mexico to the south extending to near the Yucatan Peninsula on the southern edge. The model uses nested grid cells of 36 km on the outer portions, 12 km for most of the Region 6 states (most of New Mexico and all of Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas) and 4-kilometer grid cells for much of Texas (not including West Texas and the Panhandle) and portions of nearby States. The 4-kilometer grid cells include the HGB Nonattainment Area. For more information on the modeling domain, see the MOAAD TSD. The model simulates the movement of air and emissions into and out of the three-dimensional grid cells (advection and dispersion); mixes pollutants upward and downward among layers; injects new emissions from sources such as point, area, mobile (both on-road and nonroad), and biogenic into each cell; and uses chemical reaction equations to calculate ozone concentrations based on the concentration of ozone precursors and incoming solar radiation within each cell. Air quality planners choose historical time period(s) (episode(s)) of high ozone levels to apply the model. Running the model requires large amounts of data inputs regarding the emissions and meteorological conditions during an episode.
Modeling to duplicate conditions during an historical time period is referred to as the base case modeling and is used to verify that the model system can predict historical ozone levels with an acceptable degree of accuracy. It requires the development of a base case inventory, which represents the emissions during the time period for the meteorology that is being modeled. These emissions are used for model performance evaluations. Texas modeled much of the 2012 ozone season (May 1—September 30), so the base case emissions and meteorology are for 2012. If the model can adequately replicate the measured ozone levels in the base case and responds adequately to diagnostic tests, it can then be used to project the response of future ozone levels to proposed emission control strategies.
TCEQ chose to use recent versions of Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF) version 3.7.1 for the meteorological modeling for generation of meteorological fields and the Emission Processing System (EPS) version 3 for the emission processing to generate the necessary meteorological and emission fields to be used in CAMx. TCEQ also chose one of the most recent versions of CAMx, version 6.31 for the photochemical grid modeling. WRF is considered a state of the science meteorological model and its use is acceptable in accordance with 40 CFR part 51 Appendix W Section 5. The use of EPS for emissions processing and CAMx for photochemical modeling are also one of the two predominant modeling platforms used for SIP level modeling and these models and versions that TCEQ used. EPA reviewed the models used and modeling grids and determined that the model versions used are recent versions of the model and the modeling grid is large and sufficiently sized to try and minimize the impact of sources outside the grid. Both the models used and the modeling grid are acceptable and in accordance with 40 CFR part 51 Appendix W Section 5.
Texas chose to model May 1st thru September 30th, which is the core of the 2012 ozone season (HGB ozone season is January 1st through December 31st) and includes a number of historical episodes with monitored exceedances. The 2012 ozone season was a period when multiple exceedance days occurred with a good variation of meteorological conditions that lead to ozone exceedances in the HGB area. Texas evaluated other years (2011 and 2013) in their episode selection process. The 2011 core ozone season period had a number of exceedances but was also complicated by a drought through much of Texas and surrounding states that made 2011 less desirable than 2012 which had a similar level of
We evaluated Texas' 2012 period/episode selection for consistency with our modeling guidance (2007, and Draft 2014 versions). Among the items that we considered were the ozone levels during the selected period compared to the Design Value (DV) at the time; how the meteorological conditions during the proposed episode match with the conceptual model of ozone exceedances that drive the area's DV; number of days modeled; and whether the time period selected was sufficiently representative of the meteorology that drives elevated ozone in the area. This evaluation is necessary to insure the model would be adequate for evaluating future air quality and any potential control strategies. EPA's guidance indicates that all of these items should be considered when evaluating available episodes and selecting periods/episodes to be modeled. EPA believes that the 2012 core ozone period (May 1-September 30) includes many exceedance days and is an acceptable time period for use in TCEQ's development of the 8-hour ozone attainment plan. This period has a number of meteorological conditions that are consistent with the conditions that yield high ozone in the conceptual model for the HGB area, and was among the episode periods evaluated with the highest number of ozone exceedances. In selecting periods, it is advantageous to select periods with several exceedance days and with multiple monitors exceeding the standard each day when possible. This 2012 period was among the best of all the periods evaluated when the selection was being conducted. EPA concurs with this period. See the MOAAD TSD for further discussion and analysis.
Model performance is a term used to describe how well the model predicts the meteorological and ozone levels in an historical episode. EPA has developed various diagnostic, statistical and graphical analyses which TCEQ performed to evaluate the model's performance. TCEQ performed several analyses of both interim model runs and the final base case model run and deemed the model's performance adequate for control strategy development. As described below, we agree that the TCEQ's model performance is adequate.
From 2014 to 2016, several iterations of the modeling were performed by TCEQ incorporating various improvements to the meteorological modeling, the 2012 base case emissions inventory, and other model parameters. TCEQ shared model performance analyses with EPA and EPA provided input. This data included analysis of meteorological outputs compared to benchmark statistical parameters. TCEQ also performed graphical analyses of the meteorology and extensive analyses of the photochemical modeling for several base case modeling runs.
EPA has reviewed the above information and is satisfied that the meteorological modeling was meeting most of the statistical benchmarks, and was transporting air masses in the appropriate locations for most of the days.
EPA does not expect any modeling to necessarily be able to meet all the EPA model performance goals, but relies on a holistic approach to determine if the modeling is meeting enough of the goals and the time series are close enough and diagnostic/sensitivity modeling indicates the modeling is performing well enough to be used for assessing changes in emissions for the model attainment test.
Before using the modeling for attainment test and potential control strategy evaluation, TCEQ evaluated the base case emission inventory, and made minor adjustments to the inventory to account for things that would not be expected to occur again or that were not normal. Examples of this are: (1) Inclusion of electric generating units, or EGUs, that were not operating due to temporary shutdown during the base case period but were expected to be operating in 2017 and (2) Adjusting the hour specific EGUs continuous emissions monitor (CEM) based NO
Since the HGB area is classified as a Moderate nonattainment area, the attainment date is as expeditiously as practicable but no later than July 20, 2018. To meet this deadline, it is necessary for emission reductions to be in place by no later than what is termed the attainment year, which in this case is 2017. Future case modeling using the base case meteorology and estimated 2017 emissions is conducted to estimate future ozone levels factoring in the impact of economic growth in the region and State and Federal emission controls.
EPA's 8-hour ozone modeling guidance recommends that the attainment test use the modeling analysis in a relative sense instead of an absolute sense. To predict future ozone levels, we estimate a value that we refer to as the Future Design Value (FDV). First, we need to calculate a Base Design Value (BDV) from the available monitoring data. The BDV is calculated for each monitor that was operating in the base period by averaging the three DVs that include the base year (2012). The DVs for 2010-2012, 2011-2013, and 2012-2014 are averaged to result in a center-weighted BDV for each monitor.
To estimate the FDV, a value is also calculated for each monitor that is called the Relative Response Factor
The 2014 Draft A.D. Guidance indicates that instead of using all days above the standard (0.075 ppm or 75 ppb) in the baseline, that the subset of 10 highest modeled baseline days at each monitor should be used for calculating an RRF.
EPA has reviewed the components of TCEQ's photochemical modeling demonstration and finds the analysis meets 40 CFR part 51, including 40 CFR part 51 Appendix W—Guideline on Air Quality Models. For a more complete description of the details of the base and future case modeling inputs, set-up, settings, the meteorology and photochemical model performance analysis (and EPA's evaluation of these procedures and conclusions, see the MOAAD TSD in the Docket for this action (EPA-RO6-OAR-2017-0053).
The results of the 2012 and 2017 baseline modeling run RRFs and model FDV calculations using EPA's 2014 Draft A.D Guidance methods are shown in Table 1. Table 1 includes the modeling projections prior to evaluating any other modeling sensitivity runs. EPA's full analysis for this HGB modeling and our results/conclusions for all the monitors is included in the MOAAD TSD.
The second column is the Base DV for the 2012 period. Using the 2014 Draft A.D. Guidance, 19 of the 20 HGB area monitors are in attainment and one is projected to have a 2017 FDV of 79 ppb.
The standard attainment test is applied only at regulatory monitor locations. The 2007 A.D. Guidance and the 2014 Draft A.D. Guidance both recommend that areas within or near nonattainment counties but not adjacent to monitoring locations be evaluated in an unmonitored areas (UMA) analysis to demonstrate that these UMAs are expected to reach attainment by the required future year. The UMA analysis is intended to identify any areas not near a monitoring location that are at risk of not meeting the NAAQS by the attainment date. EPA provided the Modeled Attainment Test Software (MATS) to conduct UMA analyses, but has not specifically recommended in EPA's guidance documents that the only way of performing the UMA analysis is by using the MATS software.
TCEQ used their own UMA analysis (called the TCEQ Attainment Test for Unmonitored areas or TATU). EPA previously reviewed TATU during our review of the modeling protocol for the HGB area (2010 Attainment Demonstration SIP) and we approved analysis using TATU in previous approval of the 2013 HGB 1997 8-hour attainment demonstration (See MOAAD TSD for 2013 SIP approval in Docket EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0387 (79 FR 57, January 2, 2014). We are proposing approval of the use of the TATU tool as providing an acceptable UMA analysis for this SIP approval action (See MOAAD TSD for review and evaluation details). The TATU is integrated into the TCEQ's model post-processing stream and MATS requires that modeled concentrations be exported to a personal computer-based platform, thus it would be more time consuming to use MATS for the UMA. Based on past analysis, results between TATU and MATS are similar and EPA's guidance (2007 and Draft 2014) provides states the
The TATU analysis included in the SIP indicates the maximum in most of the unmonitored areas is not significantly different than the 2017 FDVs calculated using all days above 75 ppb in the baseline (2007 A.D. Guidance). TCEQ's TATU analysis found two unmonitored areas that indicated high values above the standard but neither of these areas are higher than the area wide maximum modeled value at Manvel Croix Park monitor that is part of the monitored attainment test. One is a small unmonitored area on the Harris and Montgomery County border that is indicated just above the standard and areas in the Gulf of Mexico. The area on the Harris and Montgomery County border is an area between the Conroe and NW Harris Co. regulatory monitors but there is also a non-regulatory monitor (UH WG Jones Forest) that represents some of the area between these two regulatory monitors. In comparison to these two regulatory monitors the UH WG Jones Forest (UH WG) monitor's recent 4th High 8-hour ozone values (2013—preliminary 2017)
We agree with TCEQ's analysis finding that the 2 areas identified that are outside of the monitored areas are not a concern because they are not higher than the value predicted at Manvel Croix and because of the issues discussed above. Therefore, the 2017 FDVs are properly capturing the geographic locations of the monitored peaks and no additional significant hotspots were identified that need to be further addressed.
For a more complete description of the modeling attainment test procedures and conclusions and EPA's evaluation of these procedures and conclusions, see the MOAAD TSD in the Docket for this action.
EPA has reviewed the modeling and modeling results and finds they meet 40 CFR part 51 requirements. The modeling using the 2014 Draft A.D. Guidance indicates that 19 out of 20 of the monitors are projected to be in attainment in 2017 while one monitor has a 2017 FDV of 79 ppb, above the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS (75 ppb). EPA concludes that given that 95% of the monitors are in attainment, only one monitor is predicted above the standard, and the unmonitored area analysis did not show any areas of concern with values higher than the maximum value at the Manvel Croix monitor, the overall modeling results are within the range
A WOE analysis provides additional scientific analyses as to whether the proposed control strategy, although not modeling attainment, demonstrates attainment by the attainment date. The intent of EPA's guidance is to recognize potential uncertainty in the modeling system and future year projections therefore utilize other supplemental information or WOE in deciding if attainment will be achieved. Thus, in the HGB case, even though the modeling predicts one out of 20 monitors has an FDV above the NAAQS, additional information (WOE) can provide a basis to conclude attainment is demonstrated. EPA's guidance indicates that several items should be considered in a WOE analyses, including the following: Additional modeling, additional reductions not modeled, recent emissions and monitoring trends, known uncertainties in the modeling and/or emission projections, and other pertinent scientific evaluations. Pursuant to EPA's guidance, TCEQ supplemented the control strategy modeling with WOE analyses.
We briefly discuss the more significant components of the WOE that impacted EPA's evaluation of the attainment demonstration in this action. Many other elements are discussed in the MOAAD TSD that had less significant impact on EPA's evaluation. For EPA's complete evaluation of the WOE considered for this action, see the MOAAD TSD.
TCEQ used a modeling concept that tracks the ozone generated in the modeling from ozone precursors by location and category of type of emission source that is referred to as source apportionment.
TCEQ showed that 8-hour and 1-hour ozone DVs have decreased over the past 12 years, based on monitoring data in the HGB Area (2005 through 2016). TCEQ indicated that the 2015 8-hour ozone DV for the HGB nonattainment area is 80 ppb at Manvel Croix, which is in attainment of the former 1997 8-hour standard (84 ppb) and demonstrates progress toward the current 75 ppb standard.
TCEQ's trend line for the 1-hour ozone DV shows a decrease of about 4 ppb per year, and the trend line for the 8-hour ozone DV shows a decrease of about 2 ppb per year and reaching attainment of the 75 ppb standard in 2017. The 1-hour ozone DVs decreased about 29% from 2005 through 2016 and the 8-hour ozone DVs decreased about 23% over that same time.
EPA has also supplemented TCEQ's monitoring data analysis with additional analysis of 2014-2016 and preliminary 2017 monitoring data
The monitored DV is calculated by averaging the 4th High values from three consecutive years and truncating to integer (whole number) level in ppb. For example, the 2016 DV is the truncated average of 4th Highs from 2014-2016. See Table 3 for the 2014-prelminary 2017 4th High 8-hour values. In 2014 none of the 21 monitors in the HGB area had a 4th High 8-hour high value above 75 ppb. In 2015 worse meteorology (more conducive for formation of ozone) occurred and the 4th high 8-hour exceedance value monitored at Aldine jumped to 95 ppb with the second highest value of 91 ppb at Lang (both 27 ppb higher than their 2014 value) and 15 other monitors had 4th High 8-hour values greater than 75 ppb (17 of the 21 monitors were greater than 75 ppb). In 2016, the 4th High 8-hour values went back down and only Westhollow and Bayland Park monitors had 4th High 8-hour values greater than 75 ppb with 79 ppb and 78 ppb respectively, all other HGB area monitors (19 of 21) were 75 ppb or less. In the preliminary 2017 data, only 3 of the 21 monitors had 4th High 8-hour values above 75 ppb (Conroe—79 ppb, Clinton Drive—77 ppb, and Manvel Croix—77 ppb) and the other 18 monitors had values of 75 ppb or less. It is unusual that the 79 ppb at the Conroe monitor was the monitor with the preliminary highest 4th High in 2017 in the HGB area and the Clinton Drive monitor had a 77 ppb, as these monitors are not some of the typical High DV monitors in HGB. The Conroe and Clinton Drive monitor's 2015 and 2016 DVs are below the standard (Clinton Drive 69 ppb both years and Conroe 2015—73 ppb and 2016-72 ppb) even with the higher ozone monitored in 2015. Considering as recently as 2012, 15 of 20 monitors were violating the NAAQS, the area has had large decreases in ozone levels.
Overall as seen in Tables 2 and 3 below, 2015 stands out with high ozone monitored data compared to other recent years (2014, 2016 and preliminary 2017). These 4th High 8-hour values support that the area with recent emission levels has been close to attaining the standard for several years. The high 2015 4th High 8-hour data is driving all the DVs for 2015, 2016, and preliminary 2017. To assess what might have occurred if 2015 hadn't been such a high year we have calculated the average of the last two years (2016 and preliminary 2017) 4th Highs and all are equal to or below 75 ppb except the Bayland Park monitor with 76 ppb,
Despite the high 2015 4th High 8-hour data that contributed to higher 2015, 2016, and preliminary 2017 DV values, examination of the 4th High 8-hour values for 2014, 2016 and preliminary 2017, support the conclusion that the general long term trend identified by TCEQ of a steady reduction in DV of 2 ppb per year is anticipated to continue. Both the individual 4th High monitoring data from 2014, 2016, and 2017 and the average of the 2016 and preliminary 2017 data are strong WOE. The ozone data indicates that emission levels in HGB area and the meteorology that occurred in 2014, 2016, and 2017 have led to ozone levels that are consistent with attainment of the NAAQS. Overall, with the exception of the high 2015 data, the recent monitoring data provides a strong positive WOE.
TCEQ also submitted WOE components that are further discussed in the MOAAD TSD including the following: Conceptual model and selection of the 2012 period to fit the range of days and meteorological cycles that yield high ozone in HGB, meteorological transport clustering, additional ozone design value trends, ozone variability analysis and trends, NO
Consistent with EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.1108(c), Texas submitted a modeled attainment demonstration based on a photochemical grid modeling evaluation. EPA has reviewed the components of TCEQ's photochemical modeling demonstration and finds the analysis is consistent with EPA's guidance and meets 40 CFR part 51, including 40 CFR part 51 Appendix W—Guideline on Air Quality Models. The photochemical modeling was conducted to project 2017 ozone levels to demonstrate attainment of the standard by the attainment date. Although the modeled attainment test is not met at one of the 20 HGB monitors because one of the monitors was projected to remain above the standard, consistent with our A.D. guidance, TCEQ submitted a WOE analysis that supports that the emission levels in the area are consistent with attainment. This WOE analysis provides additional scientific analyses based on identification of emission reductions not captured in the modeling, monitoring trends, recent monitoring data (EPA included more recent monitoring data since the SIP submission) and other modeling analyses. The average of the 2016 and preliminary 2017 4th High Data indicates all monitors but one are at or below the standard. This includes the Manvel Croix monitor, the one monitor projected in the modeling to be over the standard, with a value of 73 ppb. The one monitor, which the 2016-2017 average is above standard is just 1 ppb over. The combination of the modeling and the WOE indicate that recent emission levels are consistent with attainment of the standard and demonstrate attainment by the attainment date. We are therefore proposing to approve the attainment demonstration submitted in the December 29, 2016 submittal.
A demonstration is required that all RACM necessary to demonstrate attainment as expeditiously as practicable has been adopted (CAA section 172(c)(1) and 40 CF 51.1112(c)). We consider a control measure to be necessary under the RACM requirement if it: (1) Is technologically feasible, (2) is economically feasible, (3) does not cause substantial widespread and long-term adverse impacts, (4) is not absurd, unenforceable, or impracticable and (5) can advance the attainment date by at least a year (57 FR 13498, 13560, April 16, 1992; 74 FR 2945, 2951, January 16, 2009; and 78 FR 55037, 55044, September 9, 2013).
Texas identified and analyzed whether potential control measures would be considered a RACM measure. Texas determined that none of these measures meet the five RACM criteria. We reviewed the RACM analysis and propose to approve the Texas demonstration that the HGB area has met the RACM requirement. We note that to advance the attainment date by at least a year (to July 20, 2017) additional control measures would need to be implemented at the beginning of 2016. Given the requirement for a SIP revision was published December 14, 2016, it is not feasible that additional measures could be implemented at the beginning of 2016.
CAA section 172(c)(9) require contingency measures to be implemented in the event of failure to attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date or if the area fails to make reasonable further progress. These contingency measures must be fully adopted rules or measures which are ready for implementation quickly upon failure to meet attainment. Implementation of the contingency measures should provide additional emissions reductions of up to 3% of the base year inventory (or lesser percentage that will cure the identified failure). The reductions are to be achieved in the year following the year in which the failure has been identified (57 FR 13498, 13510-12, April 16, 1992). The base year inventory is that specified by CAA section 182(b)(1)(B) and 40 CFR 51.1115.
The Texas contingency measures plan is based on (1) a 2011 base year inventory, (2) a 2% NO
Table 4 is a summary of the Texas contingency measures plan for the HGB area. As Texas has demonstrated that the base year emissions will be reduced by at least 3% from 2017 to 2018, we propose to approve the HGB contingency measures plan.
MVEBs are required for ozone attainment demonstrations to ensure that transportation plans, transportation improvement programs and federally supported highway and transit projects are consistent with (“conform to”) the purpose of the SIP. Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant NAAQS or interim reductions and milestones (81 FR 12264, 12283-84, March 6, 2015). The SIP included attainment NO
When reviewing submitted “control strategy” SIPs containing MVEBs, EPA may affirmatively find the MVEBs contained therein adequate for use in determining transportation conformity. EPA's substantive criteria for determining adequacy of a MVEB are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). EPA is evaluating the adequacy of the submitted MVEBs in parallel to this proposed approval action on the attainment demonstration. The NO
Once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEBs are adequate for transportation conformity purposes, these MVEBs must be used by state and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation projects conform to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the CAA. Within 24 months from the effective date of EPA's adequacy determination for the MVEBs or the publication date for the final rule for this action, whichever is earlier, the transportation partners will need to demonstrate conformity to the new NO
Section 110(l) of the CAA precludes EPA from approving a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and RFP (as defined in section 171 of the Act), or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. This action proposes approval of a plan that demonstrates that already adopted measures both Federal or State will provide levels of emissions consistent with attaining the ozone NAAQS. Since it is a demonstration, it will not interfere with any other requirement of the Act. Also in this action, we are proposing to approve the attainment MVEBs, which are lower than MVEBs proposed to be approved for RFP (83 FR 17964, April 25, 2018), and the contingency measures plan. The lower attainment demonstration MVEBs and on-going emission reductions through the contingency measures plan both provide progress toward attainment and as such do not interfere with any applicable requirement of the Act.
We are proposing to approve elements of a HGB area SIP revision for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Specifically, we are proposing approval of the attainment demonstration, a RACM analysis, the contingency measures plan in the event of failure to attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date, and NO
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 proposes to approve 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
• 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
• 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).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where 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).
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Ozone.
42 U.S.C. 7401
The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques and other forms of information technology.
Comments regarding this information collection received by June 28, 2018 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725—17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. Commentors are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Rural Utilities Service, USDA.
Notice and request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) invites comments on this information collection for which RUS intends to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Comments on this notice must be received by July 30, 2018.
Thomas P. Dickson, Acting Director, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP 1522, Room 5164-South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1522. Telephone: (202) 690-4492, FAX: (202) 720-8435 or email:
The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) regulation (5 CFR part 1320) implementing provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) requires that interested members of the public and affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice identifies an information collection that RUS is submitting to OMB for extension.
Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Rebecca Hunt, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, at (202) 205-3660, FAX: (202) 720-8435 or email:
The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
An ongoing data collection effort with an annual sample of the magnitude of the ACS requires that the Census Bureau continue research, testing, and evaluations aimed at improving data quality, achieving survey cost efficiencies, reducing respondent burden, and improving ACS questionnaire content and related data collection materials. The ACS Methods Panel is a robust research program focused on enhancing the quality of the respondent experience, survey operations, and data.
From 2018 to 2021, the ACS Methods Panel program may include testing methods for increasing survey efficiencies, reducing survey cost, improving the respondent experience, increasing response rates, and improving data quality. At this time, plans are in place to propose several tests:
• Mail Materials Test that will explore ways to improve the respondent experience and address respondent concerns about the perceived intrusiveness of the ACS balanced against increasing self-response to the survey.
• Self-Response Mail Messaging Tests that research various aspects of the mail materials and contact strategy.
• Multilingual Testing that would explore ways to engage respondents with limited English proficiency during the self-response portion of data collection.
• Content Tests that will test new and/or revised content.
• Respondent Burden Questions Test that would incorporate questions about respondents' experience with the survey.
• Respondent Comment/Feedback Test which would add a comment field to make it easy for respondents to give feedback about the ACS.
• Administrative Data Use Test to assess the potential for supplementing or replacing survey content with administrative data.
• Group Quarters Test to assess the feasibility of making an internet self-response option available to non-institutional GQ residents.
Since the ACS Methods Panel is designed to address emerging issues, we may conduct additional testing as needed. Any additional testing would focus on methods for reducing data collection costs, improving data quality, revising content, or testing new questions that have an urgent need to be included on the ACS. The tests may be conducted on HUs, GQs, or both. As more details are developed for the additional tests, the Census Bureau will submit a non-substantive change request, (and
The tests proposed allow the Census Bureau to continue to examine operational issues, research the data quality, collect cost information and make recommendations for improvements to this annual data collection.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Notice of an opportunity to apply for membership on the United States Travel and Tourism Advisory Board.
The Department of Commerce is currently seeking applications for membership on the United States Travel and Tourism Advisory Board (Board). The purpose of the Board is to advise the Secretary of Commerce on matters relating to the U.S. travel and tourism industry.
Applications for immediate consideration for membership must be received by the National Travel and Tourism Office by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) on Friday, June 15, 2018.
Please submit application information by email to
Brian Beall, National Travel and Tourism Office, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 10003, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202-482-0140; email:
The United States Travel and Tourism Advisory Board (Board) is established under 15 U.S.C. 1512 and under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App. (FACA). The Board advises the Secretary of Commerce on government policies and programs that affect the U.S. travel and tourism industry, including ways to ensure the United States remains the preeminent destination for international travel and tourism. The Board acts as a liaison to the stakeholders represented by the membership, consulting with them on current and emerging issues in the industry to support sustainable growth in travel and tourism.
The National Travel and Tourism Office is accepting applications for Board members. Members shall be Chief Executive Officers or senior executives from U.S. companies, U.S. organizations, or U.S. entities in the travel and tourism sectors representing a broad range of products and services, company sizes, and geographic locations. For eligibility purposes, a “U.S. company” is a for-profit firm that is incorporated in the United States (or an unincorporated U.S. firm with its principal place of business in the United States) that is controlled by U.S. citizens or by other U.S. companies. A company is not a U.S. company if 50 percent plus one share of its stock (if a corporation, or a similar ownership interest of an unincorporated entity) is known to be controlled, directly or indirectly, by non-U.S. citizens or non-U.S. companies. For eligibility purposes, a “U.S. organization” is an organization, including trade associations and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), established under the laws of the United States, that is controlled by U.S. citizens, by another U.S. organization (or organizations), or by a U.S. company (or companies), as determined based on its board of directors (or comparable governing body), membership, and funding sources, as applicable. For eligibility purposes, a U.S. entity is a tourism-related entity that can demonstrate U.S. ownership or control, including but not limited to state and local tourism marketing entities, state government tourism offices, state and/or local government-supported tourism marketing entities, and multi-state tourism marketing entities.
Members of the Board will be selected in accordance with applicable Department of Commerce guidelines based on their ability to carry out the objectives of the Board as set forth in the Board's charter and in a manner that ensures that the Board is balanced in terms of geographic diversity, diversity in size of company or organization to be represented, and representation of a broad range of services in the travel and tourism industry. Each member shall serve for two years from the date of the appointment, and at the pleasure of the Secretary of Commerce.
Members serve in a representative capacity, representing the views and interests of their particular business sector, and not as Special Government employees. Members will receive no compensation for their participation in Board activities. Members participating in Board meetings and events will be responsible for their travel, living, and other personal expenses. Meetings will be held regularly and, to the extent practical, not less than twice annually, usually in Washington, DC.
To be considered for membership, please provide the following information by the Friday, June 15, 2018 deadline to the address listed in the
1. The name and title of the individual requesting consideration.
2. A sponsor letter from the applicant on his or her company/organization/entity letterhead or, if the applicant is to represent a company/organization/entity other than his or her employer, a letter from the company/organization/entity to be represented, containing a brief statement of why the applicant should be considered for membership on the Board. This sponsor letter should also address the applicant's travel and tourism-related experience.
3. The applicant's personal resume.
4. An affirmative statement that the applicant is not required to register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended.
5. If the applicant is to represent a company, information regarding the control of the company, including the stock holdings as appropriate, signifying compliance with the criteria set forth above.
6. If the applicant is to represent an organization, information regarding the control of the organization, including the governing structure, members, and revenue sources as appropriate, signifying compliance with the criteria set forth above.
7. If the applicant is to represent a tourism-related entity, the functions and responsibilities of the entity, and information regarding the entity's U.S. ownership or control, signifying compliance with the criteria set forth above.
8. The company's, organization's, or entity's size, product or service line and major markets in which the company, organization, or entity operates.
9. A brief statement describing how the applicant will contribute to the work of the Board based on his or her unique experience and perspective (not to exceed 100 words).
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of a public meeting.
The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a four-day meeting to consider actions affecting the Gulf of Mexico fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
The meeting will be held on Monday, June 18 through Thursday, June 21, 2018.
The meeting will take place at the Marriott Beachside Key West hotel located at 3841 N. Roosevelt Boulevard, Key West, FL 33040; telephone (305) 296-8100.
Douglas Gregory, Executive Director, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; telephone (813) 348-1630.
The Coral Committee will review and discuss taking Final Action on Amendment 9: Coral Habitat Area Considered for Management in the Gulf of Mexico. The Mackerel Committee will receive an update on Coastal Migratory Pelagics (CMP) Landings, review and discuss taking Final Action on CMP Amendment 31: Atlantic Cobia Management for Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Region; and, review options for CMP Framework Amendment 7: Modifications to Gulf Cobia Size and Possession Limits. The Gulf SEDAR Committee will receive a summary from the May 2018 Steering Committee meeting.
After lunch, Sustainable Fisheries Committee will review and discuss taking Final Action on Amendment 49: Modifications to the Sea Turtle Release Gear and Framework Procedure for the Reef Fish Fishery; review proposed Aquaculture Bill and Potential Impacts; discuss draft Generic Amendment for Carryover or Unharvested Quota; and, receive the 2018 Regulatory Review.
The Council will convene in a FULL COUNCIL—CLOSED SESSION (at approximately 4 p.m.-5:30 p.m.) to review and appoint applicants to the Standing and Special Scientific and Statistical Committees (SSC); and, make final selections for the Reef Fish and Shrimp Advisory Panel members.
The Reef Fish Management Committee will convene and receive an update on Reef Fish Landings; receive assessments on SEDAR 31: Hogfish Update, SEDAR 51: Gray Snapper Benchmark, and SEDAR 52: Red Snapper Standard; and receive an update on State Management Program for Recreational Red Snapper. After lunch, the committee will review a scoping document for Reallocation of Red Snapper Annual Catch Limits (ACL); review public hearing draft for Reef Fish Amendment 48/Red Drum 5: Status Determination Criteria and Optimum Yield; review draft framework action to modify the Annual Catch Target (ACT) for Red Snapper Federal For-Hire and Private Angling Components; and, receive a Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) summary report. Under other business, the Committee will discuss Red Grouper.
The Ecosystem Committee will review a draft roadmap for Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management Regional Plan for the Gulf of Mexico. The Spiny Lobster Committee will receive an update on Spiny Lobster Landings; and, review a public hearing draft for Spiny Lobster Amendment 13. The Outreach and Education Committee will review the Council's Outreach Plan on Descending and Venting; review the Anecdotal Data Collection Tool; review of Council Communication Analytics; receive a presentation on Transition from Paper Regulations to FishRules App; and receive a summary from the Outreach and Education Technical Committee meeting.
After lunch, the Full Council will reconvene with a Call to Order, Announcements, and Introductions; Adoption of Agenda and Approval of Minutes. The Council will receive presentations from Western Central Atlantic Fishery Commission—Overview and Strategic Reorientation Process, Florida Law Enforcement, and a 6-month update on Lionfish Harvesting by Lionfish International. The Council will receive open public testimony from 2:45 p.m. until 5:30 p.m. on taking Final Action on Amendment 49: Modifications to the Sea Turtle Release Gear and Framework Procedure for the Reef Fish Fishery, Final Action on Coral Amendment 9: Habitat Areas Considered for Management in the Gulf of Mexico, and Final Action on CMP Amendment 31: Atlantic Cobia Management for Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Region; and, on any other fishery issues or concerns. Anyone wishing to speak during public comment should sign in at the registration station located at the entrance to the meeting room.
The Council will receive committee reports from Coral, Mackerel, Spiny Lobster, Sustainable Fisheries, Gulf SEDAR, Ecosystem, Outreach and Education and Reef Fish Management Committees. After lunch, the Council will review the Reef Fish and Shrimp Advisory Panel, and SSC Appointments. The Council will receive updates from the following supporting agencies: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission; U.S. Coast Guard; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and, the Department of State.
Lastly, the Council will discuss any Other Business items.
The meeting will be broadcast via webinar. You may register for the webinar by visiting
Although other non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subjects of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided that the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kathy Pereira (see
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; public meeting.
The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is scheduling a public meeting of its Skate Committee to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate.
This meeting will be held on Monday, June 11, 2018 at 2 p.m.
The meeting will be held at the Holiday Inn by the Bay, 88 Spring Street, Portland, ME 04101; telephone (207) 775-2311.
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone (978) 465-0492.
The Committee will review draft alternatives for skate wing possession limits, which are intended to prolong the skate wing fishery. They will also recommend preferred alternatives for skate wing possession limits for Framework 6 to the Council. Other Business will be discussed as necessary.
Although non-emergency issues not contained on this agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. This meeting will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is available upon request. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
16 U.S.C. 1801
U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, Office of the Department of the Air Force, Department of Defense.
Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.
The Department of Defense (DoD) is publishing this notice to announce that the following Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board will take place.
Partially Closed to the public Thursday June 14, 2018 from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Pacific Time.
Beckman Center Auditorium, Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center of the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering, 100 Academy Way, Irvine, CA 92617
Evan Buschmann, (240) 612-5503 (Voice), 703-693-5643 (Facsimile),
This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.140.
Office of Fossil Energy, Department of Energy.
Notice of orders.
The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of Energy gives notice that during April 2018, it issued orders granting authority to import and export natural gas, and to import and export liquefied natural gas (LNG), and vacating authorization. These orders are summarized in the attached appendix and may be found on the FE website at
They are also available for inspection and copying in the U.S. Department of Energy (FE-34), Division of Natural Gas Regulation, Office of Regulation and International Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, Docket Room 3E-033, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9478. The Docket Room is open between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Office of Electricity, Department of Energy.
Notice of open meeting.
This notice announces a meeting of the Electricity Advisory Committee. The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the
The meeting will be held at the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, 4301 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22203.
Matthew Rosenbaum, Office of Electricity, U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 8G-017, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585; Telephone: (202) 586-1060 or Email:
The meeting agenda may change to accommodate EAC business. For EAC agenda updates, see the EAC website at:
You may submit comments, identified by “Electricity Advisory Committee Open Meeting,” by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
DOE is responsible for the final determination concerning disclosure or nondisclosure of the information and for treating it in accordance with the DOE's Freedom of Information regulations (10 CFR 1004.11).
Delivery of the U.S. Postal Service mail to DOE may be delayed by several weeks due to security screening. DOE, therefore, encourages those wishing to comment to submit comments electronically by email. If comments are submitted by regular mail, the Department requests that they be accompanied by a CD or diskette containing electronic files of the submission.
Office of Electricity, Department of Energy.
Notice of Open Teleconference.
This notice announces a meeting of the Electricity Advisory Committee. The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the
Monday, June 25, 2018, from 11:00 a.m. to 12:55 p.m. EST. To receive the call-in number and passcode, please contact the Committee's Designated Federal Officer, Matthew Rosenbaum, at the address or phone number listed below.
Matthew Rosenbaum, Office of Electricity, U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 8G-017, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585; Telephone: (202) 586-1060 or email:
The meeting agenda may change to accommodate EAC business. For EAC agenda updates, see the EAC website at:
You may submit comments, identified by “Electricity Advisory Committee Open Meeting,” by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
The following electronic file formats are acceptable: Microsoft Word (.doc), Corel Word Perfect (.wpd), Adobe Acrobat (.pdf), Rich Text Format (.rtf), plain text (.txt), Microsoft Excel (.xls), and Microsoft PowerPoint (.ppt). If you submit information that you believe to be exempt by law from public disclosure, you must submit one complete copy, as well as one copy from which the information claimed to be exempt by law from public disclosure has been deleted. You must also explain the reasons why you believe the deleted information is exempt from disclosure.
DOE is responsible for the final determination concerning disclosure or nondisclosure of the information and for treating it in accordance with the DOE's Freedom of Information regulations (10 CFR 1004.11).
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.
Notice for solicitation of members.
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the U.S. Department of Energy is soliciting nomination for candidates to fill vacancies on the Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee (Committee).
Deadline for Technical Advisory Committee member nominations is June 30, 2018.
The nominee's name, resume, biography, and any letters of support must be submitted via one of the following methods:
(1) Email to
(2) Overnight delivery service to Dr. Mark Elless, Designated Federal Official for the Committee, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, Mail Stop EE-3B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585.
Dr. Mark Elless, Designated Federal Official for the Committee, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585; (202) 586-6501; Email:
The Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000 (Biomass Act) [Pub. L. 106-224] requires cooperation and coordination in biomass research and development
FCEA section 9008(d) established the Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee and lays forth its meetings, coordination, duties, terms, and membership types. Committee members are paid travel and per diem for each meeting. The Committee must meet quarterly and should not duplicate the efforts of other Federal advisory committees. Meetings are typically two days in duration. At least three meetings are held in the Washington DC area, with the fourth meeting possibly held at a site to be determined each year. The Committee advises DOE and USDA points of contact with respect to the Biomass R&D Initiative (Initiative) and priority technical biomass R&D needs and makes written recommendations to the Biomass R&D Board (Board). Those recommendations regard whether: (A) Initiative funds are distributed and used consistent with Initiative objectives; (B) solicitations are open and competitive with awards made annually; (C) objectives and evaluation criteria of the solicitations are clear; and (D) the points of contact are funding proposals selected on the basis of merit, and determined by an independent panel of qualified peers.
The committee members may serve two, three-year terms and committee membership must include: (A) An individual affiliated with the biofuels industry; (B) an individual affiliated with the biobased industrial and commercial products industry; (C) an individual affiliated with an institution of higher education that has expertise in biofuels and biobased products; (D) 2 prominent engineers or scientists from government (non-federal) or academia that have expertise in biofuels and biobased products; (E) an individual affiliated with a commodity trade association; (F) 2 individuals affiliated with environmental or conservation organizations; (G) an individual associated with state government who has expertise in biofuels and biobased products; (H) an individual with expertise in energy and environmental analysis; (I) an individual with expertise in the economics of biofuels and biobased products; (J) an individual with expertise in agricultural economics; (K) an individual with expertise in plant biology and biomass feedstock development; (L) an individual with expertise in agronomy, crop science, or soil science; and (M) at the option of the points of contact, other members (REF: FCEA 2008 section 9008(d)(2)(A)). All nominees will be carefully reviewed for their expertise, leadership, and relevance to an expertise. Appointments will be made for three-year terms, as dictated by the legislation.
Nominations this year are needed for the following categories in order to address the Committee's needs: (I) An individual with expertise in the economics of biofuels and biobased products; (H) an individual with expertise in energy and environmental analysis; and (J) an individual with expertise in agricultural economics. Nominations for other categories will also be accepted. Nomination categories C, D, H, I, J, K, L, and M are considered special Government employees (SGE) and require submittal of an annual financial disclosure form. In addition to the required categories, other areas of expertise of interest to the Committee are individuals with expertise in process engineering related to biorefineries, or biobased coproducts that enable fuel production.
Nominations are solicited from organizations, associations, societies, councils, federations, groups, universities, and companies that represent a wide variety of biomass research and development interests throughout the country. In your nomination letter, please indicate the specific membership category of interest. Each nominee must submit their resume and biography along with any letters of support by the deadline above. If you were nominated in previous years but were not appointed to the committee and would still like to be considered, please submit your nomination package again in response to this notice with all required materials. All nominees will be vetted before selection.
Nominations are open to all individuals without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, mental or physical handicap, marital status, or sexual orientation. To ensure that recommendations of the Technical Advisory Committee take into account the needs of the diverse groups served by DOE, membership shall include (to the extent practicable), all racial and ethnic groups, women and men, and persons with disabilities. Please note that registered lobbyists serving in an “individual capacity,” individuals already serving another Federal Advisory Committee, and Federal employees are ineligible for nomination.
Appointments to the Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee will be made by the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Agriculture.
On May 21, 2018, the Commission issued an order in Docket No. EL18-144-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an investigation into whether St. Joseph Energy Center, LLC's rates for Reactive Service may be unjust and unreasonable.
The refund effective date in Docket No. EL18-144-000, established pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication of this notice in the
Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL18-144-000 must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214, within 21 days of the date of issuance of the order.
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
Take notice that on May 18, 2018, pursuant to sections 206, 306, and 309 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e, 825e, and 825h and Rule 206 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206, Louisiana Public Service Commission (Complainant) filed a formal complaint against System Energy Resources, Inc. and Entergy Services, Inc. (Respondents) alleging that the costs of Sale-Leaseback renewal agreements for the Grand Gulf nuclear unit are imprudent, constitute a double collection in violation of the Commission ratemaking requirements and the filed rate, and are unjust and unreasonable, as more fully explained in the complaint.
The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served on contacts for Respondent.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondents' answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondents' answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainant.
The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at
This filing is accessible on-line at
Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
Western Area Power Administration, DOE.
Notice of procedures and call for 2021 Resource Pool applications.
The Department of Energy (DOE), Western Area Power Administration (WAPA), a Federal power marketing administration of DOE, is publishing procedures and calling for applications from new preference entities interested in an allocation of Federal power. WAPA published its 2021 Power Marketing Initiative (2021 PMI) for the Upper Great Plains Customer Service Region (UGPR) in the
Applications must be received by 4 p.m., MDT, on July 30, 2018. WAPA will accept applications through its online APD form, by email, or by U.S. mail (or its equivalent). Applications sent by U.S. mail will be accepted if postmarked at least 3 days before July 30, 2018, and received no later than July 31, 2018.
Submit an application online at
Ms. Nancy Senitte, Public Utilities Specialist, Upper Great Plains Customer Service Region, Western Area Power Administration, 2900 4th Avenue North, Billings, MT 59101, telephone (406) 255-2933, email
The 2021 PMI (76 FR 71015, November 16, 2011) extended the then current Marketing Plan Principles with amendments to establish how UGPR will market its power resources beginning January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2050.
After evaluating applications, if WAPA determines there is an eligible new preference entity, WAPA will publish a notice of Proposed Allocations in the
WAPA will allocate up to 1 percent (approximately 20 megawatts) of the P-SMBP—ED long-term firm hydroelectric resource available as of January 1, 2021, as firm power to eligible new preference customers. Firm power means capacity and associated energy allocated by WAPA and subject to the terms and conditions specified in the WAPA electric service contract.
WAPA will apply the following General Eligibility Criteria to applicants seeking an allocation of firm power under the 2021 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures.
A. All qualified applicants must be preference entities as defined by section 9(c) of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 (43 U.S.C. 485h(c)), as amended and supplemented.
B. All qualified applicants must be located within the currently established P-SMBP—ED marketing area.
C. All qualified applicants must not be currently receiving benefits, directly or indirectly, from a current P-SMBP—ED firm power allocation or other firm Federal power commitment. Qualified Native American applicants, who did not receive an allocation from the Post-2000, Post-2005, or Post-2010 Resource Pools, are not subject to this requirement.
D. Qualified utility and non-utility applicants must be able to use the firm power directly or be able to sell it directly to retail customers.
E. Qualified utility applicants that desire to purchase power from WAPA for resale to consumers, including cooperatives, municipalities, public utility districts, and public power districts must have met utility status by January 1, 2018. Utility status means the entity has responsibility to meet load growth, has a distribution system, and is ready, willing, and able to purchase Federal power from WAPA on a wholesale basis.
F. Qualified Native American applicants must be an Indian tribe as defined in the Indian Self Determination Act of 1975, 25 U.S.C. 5304, as amended.
WAPA will apply the following General Allocation Criteria to applicants seeking an allocation of firm power under the 2021 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures.
A. Allocations of firm power will be made in amounts as determined solely by WAPA in exercise of its discretion under Federal Reclamation Law.
B. An allottee will have the right to purchase such firm power only upon executing an electric service contract between WAPA and the allottee, and satisfying all conditions in that contract.
C. Firm power allocated under these procedures will be available only to new preference customers in the existing P-SMBP—ED marketing area. The marketing area of the P-SMBP—ED is Montana (east of the Continental Divide), all of North Dakota and South Dakota, Nebraska east of the 101° meridian, Iowa west of the 94
D. Allocations made to Native American tribes will be based on the
E. Allocations made to qualified utility and non-utility applicants will be based on the actual loads experienced in calendar year 2017. WAPA will apply the 2021 PMI criteria to these loads.
F. Energy provided with firm power will be based upon the customer's monthly system load pattern.
G. Any electric service contract offered to a new customer shall be executed by the customer within 6 months of a contract offer by WAPA, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by WAPA.
H. The resource pool will be dissolved subsequent to the closing date of the last qualified applicant to execute their respective firm electric service contract. Firm power not under contract will be used in accordance with the 2021 PMI.
I. The minimum allocation shall be 100 kilowatts (kW).
J. The maximum allocation for qualified utility and non-utility applicants shall be 5,000 kW.
K. Contract rates of delivery shall be subject to adjustment in the future as provided for in the Program.
L. If unanticipated obstacles to the delivery of hydropower benefits to Native American tribes arise, WAPA retains the right to provide the economic benefits of its resources directly to these tribes.
WAPA will apply the following General Contract Principles to all applicants receiving an allocation of firm power under the 2021 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures.
A. WAPA shall reserve the right to reduce a customer's summer season contract rate of delivery by up to 5 percent for new project pumping requirements, by giving a minimum of 5 years' written notice in advance of such action.
B. WAPA, at its discretion and sole determination, reserves the right to adjust the contract rate of delivery on 5 years' written notice in response to changes in hydrology and river operations. Any such adjustments shall only take place after a public process by WAPA.
C. Each allottee is ultimately responsible for obtaining its own third-party delivery arrangements, if necessary. WAPA may assist the allottee in obtaining third-party transmission arrangements for the delivery of firm power allocated under these procedures to new customers.
D. Contracts entered into under the 2021 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures shall provide for WAPA to furnish firm electric service effective from January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2050.
E. Contracts entered into as a result of these procedures shall incorporate WAPA's standard provisions for power sales contracts, integrated resource planning, and the General Power Contract Provisions.
Through this
Applications may be completed online on WAPA's web page at
Applicants must provide all information requested or the most reasonable available estimate on the APD form. Please indicate if the requested information is not applicable. WAPA is not responsible for errors in data or missing pages. The information in the APD form should be answered as if prepared by the entity/organization seeking the allocation of Federal power.
The information collected under this process will not be part of a system of records covered by the Privacy Act and may be available under the Freedom of Information Act. If you are submitting any confidential or business sensitive information, please mark such information before submitting your application.
When WAPA receives the APD, WAPA will verify the applicant meets the General Eligibility Criteria, and the application contains all items requested in the APD.
WAPA may request, in writing, additional information from any applicant whose APD is determined to be deficient. The applicant shall have 15 days from the postmark date on WAPA's request to provide the information. In the event an applicant fails to provide all information to WAPA, the application will not be considered.
If WAPA determines the applicant does not meet the General Eligibility Criteria, WAPA will send a letter explaining why the applicant did not qualify.
If the applicant has met the General Eligibility Criteria, WAPA will determine the amount of firm power, if any, to allocate pursuant to the General Allocation Criteria. After the publication of final allocations in the
All firm power shall be allocated according to the procedures in the General Allocation Criteria.
WAPA reserves the right to determine the amount of firm power to allocate to an applicant, as justified by the applicant in its APD.
If WAPA accepts an application and the applicant receives an allocation of Federal power, the applicant must keep all information related to the APD for a period of 3 years after signing a contract for Federal power. There is no recordkeeping requirement for unsuccessful applicants who do not receive an allocation of Federal power.
As noted in Section VII of this notice, WAPA has obtained Office of Management and Budget Clearance Number 1910-5136 for collection of the above information. The APD is collected to enable WAPA to properly perform its function of marketing limited amounts of Federal hydropower. The data supplied will be used by WAPA to evaluate who will receive an allocation of Federal power.
UGPR's 2021 PMI, published in the
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), Council on Environmental Quality NEPA implementing regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and DOE NEPA implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021), WAPA completed a Categorical Exclusion (CX). This NEPA review identified and analyzed environmental effects related to the 2021 PMI. This action falls within the 2021 PMI and, thus, is covered by the CX.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501,
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to respond to a Federal collection of information unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget control number.
WAPA has an exemption from centralized regulatory review under Executive Order 12866; accordingly, no clearance of this
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice of final Order on Petition for objection to Clean Air Act title V operating permit.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator signed an Order dated April 2, 2018, granting in part and denying in part a Petition dated September 26, 2016 from the Environmental Integrity Project, Sierra Club, and Air Alliance Houston. The Petition requested that the EPA object to a Clean Air Act (CAA) title V operating permit issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to ExxonMobil Corporation (ExxonMobil) for its Baytown Refinery located in Harris County, Texas.
The EPA requests that you contact the individual listed in the
Aimee Wilson, EPA Region 6, (214) 665-7596,
The CAA affords EPA a 45-day period to review and object to, as appropriate, operating permits proposed by state permitting authorities under title V of the CAA. Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA authorizes any person to petition the EPA Administrator to object to a title V operating permit within 60 days after the expiration of the EPA's 45-day review period if the EPA has not objected on its own initiative. Petitions must be based only on objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity during the public comment period provided by the state, unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise these issues during the comment period or unless the grounds for the issue arose after this period.
The EPA received the Petition from the Environmental Integrity Project, Sierra Club, and Air Alliance Houston dated September 26, 2016, requesting that the EPA object to the issuance of operating permit no. O1229, issued by TCEQ to ExxonMobil Baytown Refinery in Harris County, Texas. The Petition claims that: (1) The proposed permit incorporates confidential applicable requirements, (2) TCEQ did not have the authority to create a federally-enforceable PAL permit at the time PAL7 was issued, (3) the proposed permit fails to require ExxonMobil to obtain a SIP-compliant authorization for their flexible permit, (4) the proposed permits' incorporation by reference of minor NSR authorizations fails to assure compliance, (5) the proposed permit fails to require monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting sufficient to assure compliance with applicable requirements, and (6) the proposed permit fails to require monitoring that assures compliance with emission limits and caps for tanks and wastewater treatment plants.
On April 2, 2018, the EPA Administrator issued an Order granting in part and denying in part the Petition. The Order explains the basis for EPA's decision.
Sections 307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the CAA provide that a petitioner may request judicial review of those portions of an order that deny issues in a petition. Any petition for review shall be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit no later than July 30, 2018.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Notice.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR)—EPA's Light-Duty In-Use Vehicle and Engine Testing Program (Renewal), EPA ICR number 0222.11, OMB Control Number 2060-0086—to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through May 31, 2018. Public comments were previously requested via the
Comments must be submitted on or before June 28, 2018.
Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0690, to (1) EPA online using
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Lynn Sohacki, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105; telephone number: 734-214-4851; fax number: 734-214-4869; email address:
Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
The EPA in-use program can be broken down into three closely-related components. The first component involves the selection of approximately 40 classes of passenger cars and light trucks, totaling approximately 125 vehicles, for surveillance testing at EPA's National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL). In some cases, surveillance testing may be followed by confirmatory testing to develop additional information related to test failures observed in a class during surveillance testing. Confirmatory testing involves the selection of approximately one or two classes of 10 passenger cars and light trucks, averaging approximately 14 vehicles, for further testing, at EPA's NVFE. While the emissions tests that are conducted are the same for surveillance and confirmatory testing, confirmatory testing differs from surveillance testing in that the vehicles must meet stricter maintenance and use criteria. The second program component involves the testing of a subset of vehicles from the surveillance recruitment for operation of on-board diagnostics (OBD) systems. EPA does not currently recruit vehicles for OBD testing but includes the testing in this ICR in the event that OBD testing is resumed. The third component involves the special investigation of vehicles to address specific issues. This information request does not ask for approval of the information burden corresponding to such vehicles because the vehicles for this program have not been procured from the public recently and, therefore, there is no information collection burden associated with this testing.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR)—NESHAP for Group I Polymers and Resins (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 2410.04, OMB Control Number 2060-0665—to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through May 31, 2018. Public comments were previously requested via the
Additional comments may be submitted on or before June 28, 2018.
Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2013-0356, to (1) EPA online using
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; email address:
Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR)—NESHAP for Pharmaceuticals Production (40 CFR
Additional comments may be submitted on or before June 28, 2018.
Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2013-0349, to: (1) EPA online using
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; email address:
Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
83 FR 23682.
Thursday, May 24, 2018 at 10:00 a.m.
The Following Item Was Also Discussed: Adoption of Forty Year Report.
Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.
Federal Election Commission.
Notice of filing dates for special election.
Pennsylvania has scheduled a special general election on November 6, 2018, to fill the U.S. House of Representatives seat in the 7th Congressional District vacated by Representative Patrick L. Meehan.
Committees required to file reports in connection with the Special General Election on November 6, 2018, shall file a 12-day Pre-General Report, and a 30-day Post-General Report.
Ms. Elizabeth S. Kurland, Information Division, 1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20463; Telephone: (202) 694-1100; Toll Free (800) 424-9530.
All principal campaign committees of candidates who participate in the Pennsylvania Special General Election shall file a 12-day Pre-General Report on October 25, 2018; and a Post-General Report on December 6, 2018. (See chart below for the closing date for each report.)
Note that these reports are in addition to the campaign committee's regular quarterly filings. (See chart below for the closing date for each report).
Political committees filing on a quarterly basis in 2018 are subject to special election reporting if they make previously undisclosed contributions or expenditures in connection with the Pennsylvania Special General Election by the close of books for the applicable report(s). (See chart below for the closing date for each report.)
Committees filing monthly that make contributions or expenditures in connection with the Pennsylvania Special General Election will continue to file according to the monthly reporting schedule.
Additional disclosure information in connection with the Pennsylvania Special General Election may be found on the FEC website at
Principal campaign committees, party committees and Leadership PACs that are otherwise required to file reports in connection with the special elections must simultaneously file FEC Form 3L if they receive two or more bundled contributions from lobbyists/registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs that aggregate in excess of $18,200 during the special election reporting periods. (See chart below for closing date of each period.) 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(v), (b), 110.17(e)(2), (f).
On behalf of the Commission.
Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), General Services Administration (GSA).
Notice of Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) Bulletin.
The purpose of this notice is to inform agencies that FTR Bulletin 18-06 pertaining to Relocation Allowances—Relocation Income Tax (RIT) Allowance Tables is now available online at
Mr. Rick Miller, Office of Asset and Transportation Management (MA), OGP, GSA, at 202-501-3822 or via email at
The GSA published FTR Amendment 2008-04 in the
FTR Bulletin 18-06 and all other FTR Bulletins can be found at
Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), General Services Administration (GSA).
Notice of Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) Bulletin 18-05, Relocation Allowances—Taxes on Travel, Transportation, and Relocation Expenses.
The purpose of this notice is to inform Federal agencies that FTR Bulletin 18-05, pertaining to travel, transportation, and relocation allowances impacted by recent changes to Federal tax law, has been published and is now available online at
For clarification of content, please contact Mr. Rick Miller, Office of Government-wide Policy, Office of Asset and Transportation Management, at 202-501-3822, or by email at
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), HHS.
Notice, correction.
The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality published a document in the
Carla Ladner @301-427-1205 or
In the
Submission deadline on or before June 29, 2018.
In the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice with comment period.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing effort to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies the opportunity to comment on a proposed and/or continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on a proposed information collection project titled Applied Research to Address Emerging Public Health Priorities, a broad agency announcement for the competitive selection of research proposals.
CDC must receive written comments on or before July 30, 2018.
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2018-0048 by any of the following methods:
•
•
Submit all comments through the Federal eRulemaking portal (regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the address listed above.
To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact Jeffery M. Zirger, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; email:
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the
The OMB is particularly interested in comments that will help:
1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
5. Assess information collection costs.
Applied Research to Address Emerging Public Health Priorities—New ICR—National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
On March 26, 2018, CDC issued a Broad Agency Announcement (FY2018-OADS-01) available at
For this announcement, CDC has identified the following research areas of interest. Interested parties are invited to consider innovative approaches to support advanced research and development strategies in the following research areas of interest:
Contracts that are awarded based on responses to this BAA are as a result of full and open competition and therefore in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984.” CDC contracts with educational institutions, nonprofit organizations, state and local government, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in those areas covered in this BAA.
The public is invited to look at the BAA online for greater detail and more specific research areas falling under the ten topics listed above.
Authorizing legislation comes from Section 301 of the Public Health Service Act. Responses will be voluntary and it is not expected that there will be any cost to respondents other than the time to participate in information collection. The total estimated burden for all of the information collections is not expected to exceed 1,500 hours (100 hours of burden for a maximum of 15 potentially PRA-applicable contracts).
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice with comment period.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing effort to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies the opportunity to comment on a proposed and/or continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on a proposed information collection project titled Information Collection for Tuberculosis Data from Panel Physicians, which collects TB data gathered during overseas immigration medical exams.
CDC must receive written comments on or before July 30, 2018.
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2018-0049 by any of the following methods:
•
•
Submit all comments through the Federal eRulemaking portal
To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact Jeffery M. Zirger, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email:
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the
The OMB is particularly interested in comments that will help:
1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
5. Assess information collection costs.
Information Collection for Tuberculosis Data from Panel Physicians—Revision—National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC), National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Division of Global Migration and Quarantine (DGMQ), Immigrant, Refugee, and Migrant Health Branch (IRMH), requests approval for a revision of an existing information collection. This project pertains to collecting annual reports on certain tuberculosis data from U.S. panel physicians.
The respondents are panel physicians. More than 760 panel physicians from 336 panel sites perform overseas pre-departure medical examinations in accordance with requirements, referred to as technical instructions, provided by DGMQs Quality Assessment Program (QAP). The role of QAP is to assist and guide panel physicians in the implementation of the Technical Instructions; evaluate the quality of the overseas medical examination for U.S.-bound immigrants and refugees; assess potential panel physician sites; and provide recommendations to the U.S. Department of State in matters of immigrant medical screening.
To achieve DGMQ's mission, the Immigrant, Refugee and Migrant Health branch (IRMH) works with domestic and international programs to improve the health of U.S.-bound immigrants and refugees to protect the U.S. public by preventing the importation of infectious disease. These goals are accomplished through IRMH's oversight of medical exams required for all U.S.-bound immigrants and refugees who seek permanent residence in the U.S. IRMH is responsible for assisting and training the international panel physicians with the implementation of medical exam Technical Instructions (TI). Technical Instructions are detailed requirements and national policies regarding the medical screening and treatment of all U.S.-bound immigrants and refugees.
Screening for tuberculosis (TB) is a particularly important component of the immigration medical exam and allows panel physicians to diagnose active TB disease prior to arrival in the United States. As part of the Technical Instructions requirements, panel physicians perform chest x-rays and laboratory tests that aid in the identification of tuberculosis infection (Class B1 applicants) and diagnosis of active tuberculosis disease (Class A, inadmissible applicants). CDC uses these classifications to report new immigrant and refugee arrivals with a higher risk of developing TB disease to U.S. state and local health departments for further follow-up. Some information that panel physicians collect as part of the medical exam is not reported on the standard Department of State forms (DS-forms), thereby preventing CDC from evaluating TB trends in globally mobile populations and monitoring program effectiveness.
Currently, CDC is requesting this data be sent by panel physicians once per year. The consequences of reducing this frequency would be the loss of monitoring program impact and TB burdens in mobile populations and immigrants and refugees coming to the United States on an annual basis. The total hours requested is 1,008. There is no cost to the respondents other than their time.
Estimated annual burden is being reduced by 1,640 hours per year. The number of respondents is being reduced by 17. Reductions are due to revised estimates on burden time per response, and the removal of four variables from the data collection form and improved IT capacity at most panel sites.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice with comment period.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of its continuing effort to reduce public burden and maximize the utility of government information, invites the general public and other Federal agencies the opportunity to comment on a proposed and/or continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This notice invites comment on a proposed information collection project titled National HIV Behavioral Surveillance among Transgender women (NHBS-Trans). CDC is requesting a new 2-year approval to pilot collecting standardized HIV-related behavioral data from transgender women at risk for HIV systematically selected from 9 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) throughout the United States.
CDC must receive written comments on or before July 30, 2018.
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2018-0039 by any of the following methods:
•
•
Submit all comments through the Federal eRulemaking portal (
To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, contact Leroy A. Richardson, Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email:
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the
The OMB is particularly interested in comments that will help:
1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
5. Assess information collection costs.
National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System—among Transgender women (NHBS-Trans)—New—National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention (NCHHSTP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
The purpose of this data collection is to monitor behaviors related to Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) transmission and prevention in the United States of transgender women, who are known to be at high risk for HIV infection, and to assess barriers to, and best strategies for, conducting bio-behavioral surveys among minority transgender women in nine cities. This includes recruiting, interviewing and providing HIV testing and referral to services (as needed) following CDC protocol based on an existing HIV Behavioral Surveillance system. The proposed respondents are 200 adult minority trangender women in each of nine cities (1,800 interviews total) who will each respond one time over the course of the two year pilot. The information will be collected over a two year period beginning no later than two months after OMB approval.
NHBS-Trans provides information to help prevent HIV among transgender women. Preventing HIV, especially among high-risk groups, is an effective strategy for reducing individual, local, and national healthcare costs. The utility of this information is to provide CDC and local health department staff with data for evaluating progress towards local and national public health
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention request two year approval for a new information collection. Data will be collected through anonymous, in-person interviews conducted with persons systematically selected from nine Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) throughout the United States; these nine MSAs were chosen based on having high HIV prevalence. A brief screening interview will be used to determine eligibility for participation in the behavioral assessment. Participants will be recruited through respondent-driven sampling, a scientifically proven recruitment strategy for reaching hidden, hard-to-reach, or stigmatized populations. Interview data will be recorded on secure portable computers, without internet connections. Data will be transferred to secure, encrypted data servers. Data will be stored at CDC and shared with local health departments in accordance with existing data use agreements and the Assurance of Confidentiality for HIV/AIDS Surveillance Data. Data will be disseminated in aggregate through academic and agency publications, presentations, and reports. All data collection and activities will be anonymous.
Personally identifiable information (PII) is not included in the data collection. The CDC Privacy Officer has assessed this package for applicability of 5 U.S.C. 552a. The Privacy Act is not applicable because PII is not being collected under this CDC funded activity. The NHBS-Trans formative interview and optional HIV testing are anonymous (neither names nor Social Security numbers are collected). Data that will be collected through NHBS-Trans, while sensitive, are not personally identifying.
The data from the behavioral assessment will provide estimates of (1) behavior related to the risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, (2) prior testing for HIV, (3) and use of HIV prevention services. All persons interviewed will also be offered an HIV test, and will participate in a pre-test counseling session. No other federal agency systematically collects this type of information from persons at risk for HIV infection. These data have substantial impact on prevention program development and monitoring at the local, state, and national levels.
The Burden Table below shows the estimated annualized burden hours for the participants' time. Annually, 990 participants will complete an eligibility screener (an average of 5 minutes to complete), 900 participants will complete the Behavioral Assessment (an average of 40 minutes to complete), and 900 will complete the Recruiter Debriefing Form (an average of two minutes to complete). The estimated total annualized burden would be 713 hours. Participation of respondents is voluntary. There are no costs to respondents other than their time.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notification of availability.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled “Registration of Food Facilities: What You Need To Know About the FDA Regulation—Small Entity Compliance Guide.” The small entity compliance guide (SECG) is intended to help small entities comply with a final rule we issued in the
The announcement of the guidance is published in the
You may submit either electronic or written comments on Agency guidances at any time as follows:
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” We will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in our consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).
Submit written requests for single copies of the SECG to the Office of Compliance, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-800), Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740. Send two self-addressed adhesive labels to assist that office in processing your request. See the
Courtney Buchanan, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740, 240-402-2487.
The Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (Bioterrorism Act) (Pub. L. 107-188) added section 415 to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). Section 415 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 350d) requires domestic and foreign facilities that manufacture, process, pack, or hold food for human or animal consumption in the United States to register with FDA.
On October 10, 2003, we issued an interim final rule (68 FR 58894) to implement section 415 of the FD&C Act. That rule established the food facility registration regulations in part 1, subpart H (21 CFR 1.225 through 1.243). Previously, this guidance restated FDA's food facility registration regulations. This guidance also served as FDA's SECG for part 1, subpart H.
The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), enacted on January 4, 2011, amended section 415 of the FD&C Act to require that facilities engaged in manufacturing, processing, packing, or holding food for consumption in the United States submit additional registration information to FDA, including an assurance that FDA will be permitted to inspect the facility at the times and in the manner permitted by the FD&C Act. Section 415 of the FD&C Act, as amended by FSMA, also requires food facilities required to register with FDA to renew such registrations every other year, and provides FDA with authority to suspend the registration of a food facility in certain circumstances.
On July 14, 2016, we published a final rule (81 FR 45912) that amended our food facility registration regulations to reflect, among other things, the FSMA amendments to section 415 of the FD&C Act. Accordingly, FDA is revising this SECG to provide guidance intended to help small entities comply with the revised registration of food facilities requirements in part 1, subpart H.
We examined the economic implications of the final rule as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612). Although we stated that we did not believe that the final rule that amended our registration of food facilities regulations would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, we analyzed various regulatory options to examine the impact on small entities. Consistent with section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (Pub. L. 104-121, as amended by Pub. L. 110-28), we are making available the SECG to explain the actions that a small entity must take to comply with the rule.
We are issuing the SECG consistent with our good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115(c)(2)). The SECG represents the current thinking of FDA on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.
The guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. The collections of information in part 1, subpart H have been approved under the Office of Management and Budget control number 0910-0502.
Persons with access to the internet may obtain the SECG at either
Health Resources and Service Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice of Advisory Committee meeting.
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, this notice announces that the Advisory Committee on Interdisciplinary, Community-Based Linkages (ACICBL) will hold a public meeting.
Wednesday, June 6, 2018, from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Thursday, June 7, 2018, from 8:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. ET.
This is an in-person meeting and will offer virtual access through teleconference and webinar. The address for the meeting is 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857. The conference call-in number is 1-800-619-2521; passcode: 9271697. The webinar link is
Joan Weiss, Ph.D., RN, CRNP, FAAN, Senior Advisor and Designated Federal Official, Division of Medicine and Dentistry, HRSA, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 15N39, Rockville, Maryland 20857; phone (301) 443-0430; email
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Request for nominations.
HRSA is seeking nominations of qualified candidates for consideration for appointment as members of the Advisory Committee on Infant Mortality (ACIM). ACIM provides advice to the Secretary of HHS on Department activities and programs directed at reducing infant mortality and improving the health status of pregnant women and infants.
Written nominations for membership on the Committee must be received on or before Tuesday, June 26, 2018.
Nomination packages must be submitted electronically as email attachments to Dr. David de la Cruz, the Committee's Designated Federal Official, at
David de la Cruz, Ph.D., MPH. Address: Maternal and Child Health Bureau, HRSA, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 18N25, Rockville, MD 20857; phone number: (301) 443-0543; email:
ACIM provides a public and private partnership at the highest level to provide guidance and helps focus attention on the policies and resources required to address the reduction of infant mortality and perinatal health disparities. ACIM also provides advice on how best to coordinate the myriad of federal, state, local, and private programs and efforts designed to deal with the health and social problems affecting infant mortality.
The Committee advises the Secretary of HHS and the Administrator of HRSA on HHS programs and activities related to infant mortality, including implementation of the Healthy Start program and infant mortality objectives from Healthy People 2020: National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives.
Individuals selected for appointment to the Committee will be invited to serve for up to 4 years. Members are appointed as special government employees and receive a stipend and reimbursement for per diem and travel expenses incurred for attending meetings and/or conducting other business on behalf of the Committee, as authorized by Section 5 U.S.C. 5703 for persons employed intermittently in government service.
To evaluate possible conflicts of interest, individuals selected for consideration for appointment will be required to provide detailed information regarding their financial holdings, consultancies, and research grants or contracts. The selected candidates must fill out the U.S. Office of Government Ethics (OGE) Confidential Financial Disclosure Report,
A nomination package should include the following information for each nominee: (1) The name and affiliation of
HHS strives to ensure a balance of ACIM membership in terms of points of view presented and the committee's function. Therefore, we encourage nominations of qualified candidates from these groups and endeavor to make appointments to ACIM without discrimination on the basis of age, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, disability, and cultural, religious, or socioeconomic status.
ACIM was established under provisions of section 222 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 217a), as amended. The Committee is governed by provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), as well as 41 CFR part 102-3, which set forth standards for the formation and use of Advisory Committees.
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
HRSA is publishing this notice of petitions received under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (the program), as required by Section 2112(b)(2) of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act, as amended. While the Secretary of HHS is named as the respondent in all proceedings brought by the filing of petitions for compensation under the Program, the United States Court of Federal Claims is charged by statute with responsibility for considering and acting upon the petitions.
For information about requirements for filing petitions and the Program in general, contact Lisa L. Reyes, Clerk of Court, United States Court of Federal Claims, 717 Madison Place NW, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 357-6400. For information on HRSA's role in the Program, contact the Director, National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 08N146B, Rockville, MD 20857; (301) 443-6593, or visit our website at:
The program provides a system of no-fault compensation for certain individuals who have been injured by specified childhood vaccines. Subtitle 2 of Title XXI of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C. 300aa-10
A petition may be filed with respect to injuries, disabilities, illnesses, conditions, and deaths resulting from vaccines described in the Vaccine Injury Table (the table) set forth at 42 CFR 100.3. This table lists for each covered childhood vaccine the conditions that may lead to compensation and, for each condition, the time period for occurrence of the first symptom or manifestation of onset or of significant aggravation after vaccine administration. Compensation may also be awarded for conditions not listed in the table and for conditions that are manifested outside the time periods specified in the table, but only if the petitioner shows that the condition was caused by one of the listed vaccines.
Section 2112(b)(2) of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C. 300aa-12(b)(2), requires that “[w]ithin 30 days after the Secretary receives service of any petition filed under section 2111 the Secretary shall publish notice of such petition in the
Section 2112(b)(2) also provides that the special master “shall afford all interested persons an opportunity to submit relevant, written information” relating to the following:
1. The existence of evidence “that there is not a preponderance of the evidence that the illness, disability, injury, condition, or death described in the petition is due to factors unrelated to the administration of the vaccine described in the petition,” and
2. Any allegation in a petition that the petitioner either:
a. “[S]ustained, or had significantly aggravated, any illness, disability, injury, or condition not set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table but which was caused by” one of the vaccines referred to in the Table, or
b. “[S]ustained, or had significantly aggravated, any illness, disability, injury, or condition set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table the first symptom or manifestation of the onset or significant aggravation of which did not occur within the time period set forth in the table but which was caused by a vaccine” referred to in the table.
In accordance with Section 2112(b)(2), all interested persons may submit written information relevant to the issues described above in the case of the petitions listed below. Any person choosing to do so should file an original and three (3) copies of the information with the Clerk of the United States Court of Federal Claims at the address listed above (under the heading
Coast Guard, DHS.
Sixty-day notice requesting comments.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0060, Vapor Control Systems for Facilities and Tank Vessels; without change. Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA, the Coast Guard is inviting comments as described below.
Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before July 30, 2018.
You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket number [USCG-2018-0491] to the Coast Guard using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet at
Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of Information Management, telephone 202-475-3532, or fax 202-372-8405, for questions on these documents.
This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection, and other important information describing the Collection. There is one ICR for each Collection.
The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. In response to your comments, we may revise this ICR or decide not to seek an extension of approval for the Collection. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period.
We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2018-0491], and must be received by July 30, 2018.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Department of Homeland Security.
30-Day notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing collection of information.
The Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The information collection is published in the
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to
Requests for additional PRA information should be directed to Seth Renkema, Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations and Rulings, 90 K Street NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, Telephone number (202) 325-0056 or via email
CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Department of Homeland Security.
30-Day notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing collection of information.
The Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The information collection is published in the
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to
Requests for additional PRA information should be directed to Seth Renkema, Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations and Rulings, 90 K Street NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, Telephone number (202) 325-0056 or via email
CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
60-Day notice.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration (USCIS) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment upon this proposed revision of a currently approved collection of information. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the information collection notice is published in the
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until July 30, 2018.
All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1615-0053 in the body of the letter, the agency name and Docket ID USCIS-2007-0016. To avoid duplicate submissions, please use only
(1)
(2)
USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20529-2140, telephone number 202-272-8377 (This is not a toll-free number. Comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS website at
You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at:
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
Notice of availability; request for comments.
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are announcing the availability of the following documents for review and comment by the public and Federal, Tribal, State, and local governments:
• Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances for Arctic Grayling in the Centennial Valley, Montana (Centennial Valley CCAA), and
• Draft Environment Assessment of the Centennial Valley CCAA (EA).
The Service, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP), and local partners prepared the draft Centennial Valley CCAA to give non-Federal landowners the opportunity to voluntarily conserve Arctic grayling (a fish species) and its habitat in the Centennial Valley, Montana. The MFWP is applying for an enhancement of survival permit under the ESA to enroll landowners in the Centennial Valley CCAA. To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, the Service prepared the draft EA.
Written comments must be submitted by June 28, 2018.
To request further information or send written comments, please use one of the following methods, and note that your information request or comments are in reference to the Centennial Valley CCAA.
○
○
○
○
James Boyd, Montana Ecological Services Field Office (see
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are announcing the availability of the following documents for review and comment by the public and Federal, Tribal, State, and local governments:
• Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances for Arctic Grayling in the Centennial Valley, Montana (Centennial Valley CCAA), and
• Draft Environment Assessment of the Centennial Valley CCAA (EA).
The Service, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP), and local partners prepared the Centennial Valley CCAA to give non-Federal landowners the opportunity to voluntarily conserve Arctic grayling (a fish species) and its habitat in the Centennial Valley, Montana. Participating landowners would implement certain conservation measures to reduce or eliminate threats to the Arctic grayling on their property related to ranching activities and associated water uses. In return, the Service would give participating landowners regulatory assurances that it will not impose land or water use restrictions or conservation requirements beyond those in the CCAA, if the Arctic grayling becomes listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). MFWP is applying for an enhancement of survival permit under the ESA, to enroll landowners in the Centennial Valley CCAA with certificates of inclusion. To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), we prepared a draft EA that analyzes potential impacts to the human environment from the proposed Centennial Valley CCAA and a no-action alternative.
We determined that the Upper Missouri River Distinct Population Segment of the Arctic grayling was not warranted for listing under the ESA, and announced that finding in the
The population of Arctic grayling in the Centennial Valley in Beaverhead County, Montana, is increasing in distribution in and around Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge). However, reduced stream flows, degraded and non-functioning instream and riparian habitats, barriers to Arctic grayling movement, and entrainment of Arctic grayling in irrigation ditches on non-Federal lands surrounding the Refuge are likely inhibiting further increases in distribution and abundance in the Centennial Valley. Thus, the Service and MFWP developed the programmatic Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances (CCAA) for Arctic Grayling in the Centennial Valley, to encourage landowners to voluntarily implement conservation measures to alleviate these limiting factors on their properties.
A CCAA is an agreement between the Service, partners, and landowners for voluntary management of non-Federal lands to remove or reduce threats to species that may become listed under the ESA. In return for implementing conservation measures in a CCAA, the Service gives participants assurances that, should the covered species become listed, the Service would not impose land, water, or resource use restrictions or conservation requirements beyond those agreed to in the CCAA.
Under the Centennial Valley CCAA, the Service would issue MFWP an Enhancement of Survival Permit (permit) under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA effective for 20 years. MFWP would enroll interested non-Federal landowners under the permit with Certificates of Inclusion (CI) contingent on development of a site-specific conservation plan for the enrolled property. The CI would convey to the enrolled landowner a specified level of authorized take of Arctic grayling that may result from implementation of the conservation measures in the site-specific plan, if and when the species becomes listed.
The proposed issuance of a permit with its associated CCAA is a Federal action that requires us to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321
You may submit your comments and materials by one of the methods listed in the
All comments and materials we receive become part of the public record associated with this action. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifiable information (PII) in your comments, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your PII—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your PII from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we use in preparing the EA, will be available for public inspection by appointment, during normal business hours, at our Montana Field Office (see
After reviewing public comments, we will evaluate whether the proposed action in the draft EA is adequate to support a finding of no significant impact under NEPA or we should prepare an environmental impact statement. As part of the basis for that determination, we will conduct an intra-Service consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the ESA to determine whether the proposed permit action and CCAA would jeopardize the continued existence of the Arctic grayling or any other candidate, proposed, or listed species that may be affected. We will then determine whether implementation of the proposed CCAA would meet the requirements for issuance of a section 10(a)(1)(A) permit (50 CFR 17.22(d)(2)). We will not make our final decision until after the end of the 30-day public comment period, and we will fully consider all comments we receive during the public comment period.
We provide this notice in accordance with the requirements of section 10(c) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
Notice of realty action.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has examined and found suitable for lease to the City of Mesquite, Nevada, for airport purposes under the Act of May 24, 1928, as amended, a parcel of public land located in Mohave County, Arizona, totaling approximately 6.005 acres. The City of Mesquite has applied for a renewal lease and to amend its lease to bring it into Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) safety compliance standards.
Interested parties may submit written comments regarding the proposed lease renewal and amendment to the existing lease on or before July 13, 2018.
Comments concerning this notice should be addressed to Lorraine M. Christian, Field Manager, BLM Arizona Strip Field Office, 345 East Riverside Dr., St. George, UT 84790.
Amanda Harrington, Assistant Field Office Manager, at the above address; phone 435-688-3271; or by email at
The BLM has examined and found the following described public land in Mohave County, Arizona, suitable for lease under the Act of May 24, 1928, as amended (49 U.S.C. Appendix 211-213), and 43 CFR 2911:
BEING A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW
BEGINNING AT MILE POST 311 ON THE ARIZONA NEVADA STATE LINE, SAID MILE POST BEING NORTH 01°40′13″ WEST, 4424.95 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 40 NORTH, RANGE 16 WEST, GILA AND SALT RIVER MERIDIAN;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID STATE LINE, NORTH 01°40′13″ WEST, A DISTANCE OF 100.43 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE, SOUTH 42°12′37″ EAST, A DISTANCE OF 194.53 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 71°07′11″ EAST, A DISTANCE OF 43.96 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 17°38′46″ EAST, A DISTANCE OF 469.15 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 16°43′14″ WEST, A DISTANCE OF 126.23 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 12°28′57″ WEST, A DISTANCE OF 519.17 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 27°38′58″ WEST, A DISTANCE OF 265.39 FEET TO SAID STATE LINE; THENCE NORTH 01°40′13″ WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1,368.45 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
HAVING AN AREA OF 261,891 SQUARE FEET, 6.01 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
BASIS OF BEARING
N 01°40′13″ W, BEING THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 40 NORTH, RANGE 16 WEST, GILA AND SALT RIVER MERIDIAN, MOHAVE COUNTY, ALSO BEING THE STATE LINE OF NEVADA AND ARIZONA FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 29 TO MILE MARKER 311, AS SHOWN ON THE UNRECORDED DRAWING TITLED
This notice informs the public that the City of Mesquite, in coordination with the FAA, submitted an application to both renew and amend its existing airport lease (AZA-24176) to comply with FAA requirements. The proposal is includes relinquishing 0.74 acres of the lease in an area northeast of the airport, referred to as the NAV AID site, which is no longer needed, and leasing an additional 0.76 acres to the north and south of the current lease area in order to move the existing perimeter fence outside of the obstacle-free zone. This would bring the total acreage of the leased area to approximately 6.005 acres.
Issuance of the lease is in accordance with the Arizona Strip Resource Management Plan (RMP), Decision No. MA-LR-06. Individual land use authorizations (rights-of-way, permits, leases, easements) will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis in accordance with other RMP provisions and compliance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.
This notice segregates the above-described public lands from operation of the public land laws, including the mining laws. The segregative effect will end upon issuance of the lease or on May 29, 2019, whichever occurs first.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made available to the public at any time. While you can ask in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
43 CFR 2911.
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
Notice of realty action.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is proposing a noncompetitive (direct) sale of 3,180.35 acres of public land in Maricopa County, Arizona, and 200.64 acres of public land in Pinal County, Arizona, a total of 3,380.69 acres at no less than the appraised fair market value to the Gila River Indian Community (GRIC). The sale is subject to the provisions of Sections 203 and 209 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA). Because disposal of these lands is restricted to Federal, State, local, and tribal governments and agencies, the publication of this notice represents a formal opportunity for any qualified purchasers to express interest in the subject lands. If interest in purchase, at fair market value, is indicated by another qualified party, the BLM will proceed with a modified competitive sale of the lands. If no qualified parties express interest, the BLM will proceed with a noncompetitive sale.
The BLM is seeking comments from the public and interested parties regarding the noncompetitive (direct) sale and comments must be received by the BLM within 45 days of the date this notice is published in the
Written comments concerning the noncompetitive (direct) sale should be sent to Edward J. Kender, Field Manager, BLM Lower Sonoran Field Office, Phoenix District Office, 21605 North 7th Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85027.
Lane Cowger, Project Manager, Arizona State Office at 602-417-9612 or by email at
The BLM has received a proposal from the GRIC to purchase the public lands described in this Notice at fair market value. The lands are located in Maricopa and Pinal Counties and are being considered for noncompetitive (direct) sale under the authority of Sections 203 and 209 of FLPMA (90 Stat. 2750, 43 U.S.C. 1713 and 1719), and the regulations at 43 CFR 2710 and 2720.
The areas described aggregate approximately 3,380.69 acres. The Sections noted above in T. 2 S., R. 1 W., are located in Maricopa County and are on the western border of the Gila River Indian Reservation. The Sections within the above T. 5 S., R. 5 E., are in Pinal County and lie along the Reservation's southern border. The lands surrounding the parcels are non-BLM lands, including lands owned by GRIC. Section 203 of FLPMA establishes the criteria under which a sale of public land is permitted. The sale is in conformance with the Lower Sonoran Record of Decision (ROD) and Resource Management Plan (RMP), approved on September 14, 2012. The parcels are identified for disposal in the RMP Record of Decision (LR-2.1.1). The RMP limits the disposal of these parcels to Federal, State, local, or tribal governmental entities. These governmental entities will be notified of the proposed sale to allow them the opportunity to express an interest in participating in a modified competitive sale.
Consistent with the RMP, the subsurface estate will be included in this sale, as no mineral values have been identified in the project environmental analysis. Regulations contained at 43 CFR 2711.3-3(a) provide for a noncompetitive (direct) sale when the public interest would best be served to protect existing equities. However, after the public comment period is over the BLM will determine whether or not to pursue a modified competitive sale, or proceed with the noncompetitive (direct) sale as described in this Notice.
The sale parcels will be analyzed in a site-specific Environmental Assessment (EA). In addition, other resource surveys and evaluations are currently being conducted and will be complete prior to BLM making a final decision on this proposed sale. The parcels are being offered in this Notice of Realty Action as a noncompetitive (direct sale) to protect cultural resources and archaeological sites within the parcels that are of cultural significance to the GRIC. These sites include plant, animal, raw material resources gathering areas, areas of cultural and religious significance, and trail systems and transportation routes with cultural and religious significance.
Pursuant to 43 CFR 2711.1-2(d) and upon publication of the notice in the
In addition to the appraised fair market value, the purchaser will be required to pay a $50 nonrefundable filing fee for conveyance of the available mineral interests and the associated administrative costs.
The following terms and conditions will be accepted and reserved to the United States:
A right-of-way thereon for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, Act of August 30, 1890 (43 U.S.C. 945).
And will be subject to:
1. All valid existing rights.
2. Those rights for a water facility granted to Maricopa County Flood Control, its successors or assigns, by right-of-way No. AZA-26798, pursuant to the Act of October 21, 1976 (43 U.S. C. 1761).
3. Those rights for power line purposes granted to Tucson Electric Power Company, its successors or assigns, by right-of-way No. AZA-7274, pursuant to the Act of March 4, 1911 (43 U.S.C. 961).
4. Those rights for power line purposes granted to Tucson Electric Power Company, its successors or assigns, by right-of-way No. AZA-7872, pursuant to the Act of March 4, 1911 (43 U.S.C. 961).
Information concerning the sale, including a map delineating the noncompetitive direct sale parcels and, when available, the appraisal and mineral report will be available for public review during normal business hours at the BLM, Lower Sonoran Field Office, located at the above address. Once completed, the map and EA will be viewable at
Public comments concerning the noncompetitive direct sale may be submitted in writing to the BLM Lower Sonoran Field Manager as noted in the above
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be advised that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold from public review your personal identifying information, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
43 CFR 2711.1-2 and 2720.1-1(b)
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
Public land order.
This Order revokes the withdrawal created by two Executive Orders as they affect 70.97 acres located at Turn Point, Stuart Island, San Juan Islands, Washington, reserved for use by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) for lighthouse purposes. This Order also transfers administrative jurisdiction over the subject land to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to be managed as part of the San Juan Islands National Monument (Monument).
This Public Land Order takes effect: May 29, 2018.
Jacob Childers, Oregon State Office, BLM, at 503-808-6225, or by email at
The USCG has determined that the reservation for the Turn Point Light Station is no longer needed. The land was incorporated into the Monument by Presidential Proclamation No. 8947 of March 25, 2013, (78 FR 18790 (2013)). In accordance with Presidential Proclamation No. 8947, the lands shall remain closed to appropriation under the general land laws and location and entry under the United States mining laws, subject to valid existing rights and the requirements of applicable law.
By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior by Section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714, it is ordered as follows:
1. The withdrawal created by Executive Orders dated July 15, 1875, and June 6, 1891, which reserved public land at Turn Point for lighthouse purposes, is hereby revoked in-part insofar as it affects the following described land:
The area described contains 70.97 acres.
2. Administrative jurisdiction over the land described in Paragraph 1 is hereby transferred to the BLM to be managed as part of the National Monument established by Presidential Proclamation No. 8946 of March 25, 2013 (79 FR 18790). Subject to valid existing rights, in accordance with Presidential Proclamation No. 8946, the land shall remain closed to all forms of entry, location, selection, sale, leasing, or other disposition under the public land laws, including withdrawal from location, entry, and patent under the mining laws, and from disposition under all laws relating to mineral and geothermal leasing other than by exchange that furthers the protective purposes of the Proclamation.
This document was received for publication by the Office of the
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice.
The Commission hereby gives notice of the institution of investigations and commencement of preliminary phase antidumping and countervailing duty investigation Nos. 701-TA-607 and 731-TA-1417-1419 (Preliminary) pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”) to determine whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of imports of steel propane cylinders from China, Taiwan, and Thailand, provided for in statistical reporting numbers 7311.00.0060 and 7311.00.0090 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value and alleged to be subsidized by the Government of China. Unless the Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) extends the time for initiation, the Commission must reach a preliminary determination in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations in 45 days, or in this case by July 6, 2018. The Commission's views must be transmitted to Commerce within five business days thereafter, or by July 13, 2018.
May 22, 2018.
Lawrence Jones, (202) 205-3358,
For further information concerning the conduct of these investigations and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 207).
In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the investigations must be served on all other parties to the investigations (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service.
These investigations are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.12 of the Commission's rules.
By order of the Commission.
On June 8, 2017, the Assistant Administrator, Diversion Control Division, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to Show Cause to Jopindar P. Harika, M.D. (hereinafter, Registrant), of Monroeville, Pennsylvania. The Show Cause Order proposed the revocation of Registrant's DEA Certificate of Registration on two grounds: (1) That he does “not have authority to handle controlled substances in the State of Pennsylvania, the [S]tate in which [he is] registered with the” Agency, and (2) that he has “been convicted of a felony offense related to controlled substances.” Show Cause Order, at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a) (2) & (3)).
As to the jurisdictional basis for the proceeding, the Show Cause Order alleged that Registrant is the holder of Certificate of Registration No. FH4408248 pursuant to which he is authorized to dispense controlled substances in schedules II through V, at the registered address of 321 Red Oak Court, Monroeville, Pennsylvania.
As for the substantive grounds for the proceeding, the Show Cause Order alleged that on April 8, 2016, the State of Pennsylvania suspended Registrant's “authority to prescribe and administer controlled substances” and that he is “without authority to handle controlled substances in Pennsylvania, the [S]tate in which [he is] registered with the” Agency.
On June 9, 2017, more than 14 months after the Board's Action, a Diversion Investigator (DI) attempted to serve the Show Cause Order on Registrant by Certified Mail addressed to him at his registered address in Monroeville, Pennsylvania. GX 6, at 1 (Declaration of DI). Also on June 9, the DI mailed a copy of the Show Cause Order address to Registrant at the “Berks County Jail System, 1287 County Welfare Road, Leesport, PA 19533,” which the DI states is his “last known address.”
On June 21, 2017, the DI re-mailed the Show Cause Order to Registrant at both addresses by First Class Mail. GX 6, at 1. According to the DI, the mailing to the jail “was returned . . . on June 29, 2017, with the response `person no longer confined here.' No response was obtained from the USPS First Class letter sent to Respondent's registered address.”
Thereafter, on July 10, 2017, the Government submitted a Request for Final Agency Action. Therein, the Government asserted that it was forwarding the matter to my Office “because more than thirty days have passed since the Order to Show Cause was served on [Registrant] and no request for hearing has been received by DEA.” GX 4, at 1 (Req. for Final Agency Action).
On review, I concluded that the Government's Request for Final Agency Action was premature because it did not wait at least 30 days from the effective date of service before submitting its request. GX 5, at 2 (Order, Oct. 17, 2017). Therein, I first held that the Government's initial efforts to serve Registrant by certified mail which, in both instances, were returned to the Government, were clearly inadequate to effect service under
As for the Government's subsequent mailing of the Show Cause Order by regular first class mail to Respondent's registered address, I explained that while this may have been effective, given that the previous mailing was returned with the notation “moved/left no address unable to forward,” the
I further noted that even assuming that this mailing was adequate to effect service, “Registrant would have had until July 24, 2017 to file a hearing request or a written statement.”
I therefore denied the Government's Request for Final Agency Action without prejudice.
Thereafter, on November 6, 2017, the DI went to Registrant's registered address in Monroeville, Pennsylvania. GX 6, at 2. According to the DI, upon her arrival, she “knocked on the door, but there was no answer.”
The DI also noted that “[t]here is no email address listed for Registrant in DEA's registration database,” and thus, “electronic delivery of [the Show Cause Order] to Registrant is not possible.”
On January 30, 2018, the Government submitted a Second Request for Final Agency Action (RFAA II). Therein, the Government asserts that its case agent “has made numerous attempts to serve the [Show Cause Order] on Registrant over the course of several months.” RFAA II, at 2. The Government further states that “the case agent has been unable to determine the whereabouts of the Registrant, much less effect service of the Order upon him,”
The Government thus argues that it “has now exhausted all reasonable attempts to serve Registrant with the Order,” and notes that it “is not required to undertake `heroic efforts' to find a registrant.” RFAA II, at 2, & n.3 (quoting
Because I again find that the Government has failed to provide notice reasonably calculated to apprise Registrant of the proceeding, I deny its Request for Final Agency Action. It is true that Due Process does not require that Registrant receive actual notice of the Show Cause Order. Rather, the Government's obligation is limited to providing “`notice reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise [him] of the pendency of the action.'”
On the other hand, the Government is required “to consider unique information about an intended recipient regardless of whether a statutory scheme is reasonably calculated to provide notice in the ordinary case.”
Here, I conclude that none of the Government's attempts at service were adequate under
As for the Government's assertion that it has “exhausted all reasonable efforts to locate Registrant,” this may be, but the Government has identified no such efforts it made other than the visit to an address that the Government already knew the Registrant had vacated. And while the Government is correct that it is not required to undertake “heroic efforts” to find a registrant, visiting Registrant's residence after knowing that the Post Office previously had indicated that he had moved cannot be fairly characterized as a “heroic effort[].”
Accordingly, I again hold that the Government has not established that it has provided notice reasonably calculated to apprise Registrant of the proceeding. I therefore deny the Government's Second Request for Final Agency Action.
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Office, Department of Justice.
30-Day notice.
The Department of Justice (DOJ), Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Office, will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This proposed information collection was previously published in the
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional days until June 28, 2018.
If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Kimberly J. Brummett, Program Specialist, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Office, 145 N Street NE, Washington, DC 20530 (phone: 202-353-9769). Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20530 or sent to
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
On May 21, 2018, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed consent decree with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in the lawsuit entitled
The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the proposed consent decree and proposed settlement agreement. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to
During the public comment period, the proposed consent decree and proposed settlement agreement may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department website:
Please enclose a check or money order for $7.75 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury.
Pursuant to the authority contained in Section 512 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1142, the 191st meeting of the Advisory Council on Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans (also known as the ERISA Advisory Council) will be held on June 19-21, 2018.
The three-day meeting will take place at the U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210 in C5521 Room 4. The meeting will run from 9:00 a.m. to approximately 5:30 p.m. on June 19-20 with a one hour break for lunch each day, and from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. on June 21. The purpose of the open meeting is for Advisory Council members to hear testimony from invited witnesses and to receive an update from the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA). The EBSA update is scheduled for the morning of June 21, subject to change.
The Advisory Council will study the following topics: (1) Lifetime Income Products as a Qualified Default Investment Option (QDIA)—Focus on Decumulation and Rollovers and (2) Evaluating the Department's Regulations and Guidance on ERISA Bonding Requirements and Exploring Reform Considerations. The Council will hear testimony on June 19 on the first topic and on June 20 on the second topic. It will continue with discussions of its topics on June 21. Descriptions of these topics are available on the Advisory Council page of the EBSA website, at
Organizations or members of the public wishing to submit a written statement may do so by submitting 35 copies on or before June 12, 2018, to Larry Good, Executive Secretary, ERISA Advisory Council, U.S. Department of Labor, Suite N-5623, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210. Statements also may be submitted as email attachments in word processing or pdf format transmitted to
Individuals or representatives of organizations wishing to address the Advisory Council should forward their requests to the Executive Secretary or telephone (202) 693-8668. Oral presentations will be limited to 10 minutes, time permitting, but an extended statement may be submitted for the record. Individuals with disabilities who need special accommodations should contact the Executive Secretary by June 12.
Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Labor.
Notice.
Title I of WIOA (Pub. L. 113-128) requires the U.S. Secretary of Labor (Secretary) to update and publish the LLSIL tables annually, for uses described in the law (including determining eligibility for youth). WIOA defines the term “low income individual” as one whose total family income does not exceed the higher level of the poverty line or 70 percent of the LLSIL. This issuance provides the Secretary's annual LLSIL for 2018 and references the current 2018 Health and Human Services “Poverty Guidelines.”
This notice is applicable May 29, 2018.
Please contact Samuel Wright, Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room C-4526, Washington, DC 20210; Telephone: 202-693-2870; Fax: 202-693-3015 (these are not toll-free numbers); Email address:
Please contact Jennifer Kemp, Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Room N-4464, Washington, DC 20210; Telephone: 202-693-3377; Fax: 202-693-3113 (these are not toll-free numbers); Email:
The purpose of WIOA is to provide workforce investment activities through statewide and local workforce investment systems that increase the employment, retention, and earnings of participants. WIOA programs are intended to increase the occupational skill attainment by participants and the quality of the workforce, thereby reducing welfare dependency and enhancing the productivity and competitiveness of the Nation.
LLSIL is used for several purposes under the WIOA. Specifically, WIOA section 3(36) defines the term “low income individual” for eligibility purposes, and sections 127(b)(2)(C) and 132(b)(1)(B)(v)(IV) define the terms “disadvantaged youth” and “disadvantaged adult” in terms of the poverty line or LLSIL for State formula allotments. The governor and state/local
WIOA Section 3(36)(B) defines LLSIL as “that income level (adjusted for regional, metropolitan, urban and rural differences and family size) determined annually by the Secretary [of Labor] based on the most recent lower living family budget issued by the Secretary.” The most recent lower living family budget was issued by the Secretary in fall 1981. The four-person urban family budget estimates, previously published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), provided the basis for the Secretary to determine the LLSIL. BLS terminated the four-person family budget series in 1982, after publication of the fall 1981 estimates. Currently, BLS provides data to ETA, which ETA then uses to develop the LLSIL tables, as provided in the Appendices to this
ETA published the 2017 updates to the LLSIL in the
The updated figures for a four-person family are listed in Appendix A, Table 1, by region for both metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas. Numbers in all of the Appendix tables are rounded up to the nearest dollar. Since program eligibility for “low-income individuals”, “disadvantaged adults” and “disadvantaged youth” may be determined by family income at 70 percent of the LLSIL, pursuant to WIOA Section 3 (36)(A)(ii) and Section 3(36)(B), respectively, those figures are listed as well.
Jurisdictions included in the various regions, based generally on the Census Regions of the U.S. Department of Commerce, are as follows:
Additionally, separate figures have been provided for Alaska, Hawaii, and Guam as indicated in Appendix B, Table 2.
Data on 23 selected Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) are also available. These are based on annual CPI-U changes for a 12-month period ending in December 2017. The updated LLSIL figures for these MSAs and 70 percent of LLSIL are reported in Appendix C, Table 3.
Appendix D, Table 4 lists each of the various figures at 70 percent of the updated 2017 LLSIL for family sizes of one to six persons. Because Tables 1-3 only list the LLSIL for a family of four, Table 4 can be used to separately determine the LLSIL for families of between one and six persons. For families larger than six persons, an amount equal to the difference between the six-person and the five-person family income levels should be added to the six-person family income level for each additional person in the family. Where the poverty level for a particular family size is greater than the corresponding 70 percent of the LLSIL figure, the figure is shaded. A modified Microsoft Excel version of Appendix D, Table 4, with the area names, will be available on the ETA LLSIL website at
Governors should designate the appropriate LLSILs for use within the State from Appendices A, B, and C, containing Tables 1 through 3. Appendices D and E, which contain Tables 4 and 5, which adjust a family of four figure for larger and smaller families, may be used with any LLSIL designated area. The governor's designation may be provided by disseminating information on MSAs and metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas within the state or it may involve further calculations. For example, the State of New Jersey may have four or more LLSIL figures for Northeast metropolitan, Northeast non-metropolitan, portions of the state in the New York City MSA, and those in the Philadelphia MSA. If a workforce investment area includes areas that would be covered by more than one LLSIL figure, the governor may determine which is to be used.
A state's policies and measures for the workforce investment system shall be accepted by the Secretary to the extent
It should be noted that publication of these figures is only for the purpose of meeting the requirements specified by WIOA as defined in the law and regulations. BLS has not revised the lower living family budget since 1981, and has no plans to do so. The four-person urban family budget estimates series has been terminated. The CPI-U adjustments used to update LLSIL for this publication are not precisely comparable, most notably because certain tax items were included in the 1981 LLSIL, but are not in the CPI-U. Thus, these figures should not be used for any statistical purposes, and are valid only for those purposes under WIOA as defined in the law and regulations.
To use the 70 percent LLSIL value, where it is stipulated for the WIOA programs, begin by locating the region or metropolitan area where the program applicant resides. These are listed in Tables 1, 2 and 3. After locating the appropriate region or metropolitan statistical area, find the 70 percent LLSIL amount for that location. The 70 percent LLSIL figures are listed in the last column to the right on each of the three tables. These figures apply to a family of four. Larger and smaller family eligibility is based on a percentage of the family of four. To determine eligibility for other size families consult Table 4 and the instructions below.
To use Table 4, locate the 70 percent LLSIL value that applies to the individual's region or metropolitan area from Tables 1, 2 or 3. Find the same number in the “family of four” column of Table 4. Move left or right across that row to the size that corresponds to the individual's family unit. That figure is the maximum household income the individual is permitted in order to qualify as economically disadvantaged under the WIOA.
Where the HHS poverty level for a particular family size is greater than the corresponding LLSIL figure, the LLSIL figure appears in a shaded block. Individuals from these size families may consult the 2017 HHS poverty guidelines found on the Health and Human Services website at
To use the LLSIL to determine the minimum level for establishing self-sufficiency criteria at the State or local level, begin by locating the metropolitan area or region from Table 1, 2 or 3. Then locate the appropriate region or metropolitan statistical area and then find the 2015 adjusted LLSIL amount for that location. These figures apply to a family of four. Locate the corresponding number in the family of four in the column below. Move left or right across that row to the size that corresponds to the individual's family unit. That figure is the minimum figure that States must set for determining whether employment leads to self-sufficiency under WIOA programs.
Notice.
The Department of Labor (DOL), Employment and Training Administration (ETA), is soliciting comments concerning a proposed extension for the authority to conduct the information collection request (ICR) titled, “Pre-Apprenticeship—Pathways to Success.” This comment request is part of continuing Departmental efforts to reduce paperwork and respondent burden in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).
Consideration will be given to all written comments received by July 30, 2018.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free by contacting Amy Firestone by telephone at 202-693-3998, TTY at 1-877-889-5627, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at
Submit written comments about, or requests for a copy of, this ICR by mail or courier to U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, Office of Apprenticeship, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room C-5321, Washington, DC 20210; by email:
Contact Amy Firestone by telephone at 202-693-3998 (this is not a toll-free number) or by email at
44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).
The DOL, as part of continuing efforts to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information before submitting them to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for final approval. This program helps to ensure requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements can be properly assessed.
Through a variety of approaches, pre-apprenticeship programs can be adapted to meet the needs to train different populations, the various employers and other sponsors they serve, and the specific opportunities available in the local labor market. The online database of quality pre-apprenticeship programs provides a valuable tool for job seekers, apprenticeship programs, and American Job Centers' front line staff. A dedicated database provides a way for job seekers and apprenticeship programs to access pre-apprenticeship programs that meet the requirements outlined in Training and Employment Notice (TEN) 13-12: “Defining a Quality Pre-Apprenticeship Program and Related Tools and Resources.” The “Pre-apprenticeship—Pathways to Success” database enables ETA to identify pre-apprenticeship programs that meet the “quality pre-apprenticeship” definition and the quality framework criteria. Even more importantly, a national database of pre-apprenticeship programs facilitates connections between pre-apprenticeship program participants and apprenticeship programs, resulting in expanded opportunities. This voluntary data is collected using an online form.
The public seeking information about pre-apprenticeship programs goes to a map on a website, chooses a state, and views information about the location of pre-apprenticeship programs, including general descriptions of the services and training they provide. ETA is proposing an extension for the authority to conduct the information collection “Pre-Apprenticeship—Pathways to Success,” to continue to utilize the database and make updates to the online form. During the past several years, ETA has worked to expand pre-apprenticeships and apprenticeships with new companies in high demand industries. The collection instrument is adding several questions to reflect the expansion of the apprenticeship system as outlined in the 2017 Presidential Executive Order “Expanding Apprenticeships in America”
The current online form does not contain questions on new types of programs and their employer and educational institution partners. This data is instrumental in helping expand the functionality and usage of the database.
The National Apprenticeship Act of 1937, (subsequently referred to as “the Act”) Section 50 (29 U.S.C. 50), authorizes and directs the Secretary of Labor “to formulate and promote the furtherance of labor standards necessary to safeguard the welfare of apprentices, to extend the application of such standards by encouraging the inclusion thereof in contracts of apprenticeship, to bring together employers and labor for formulating programs of apprenticeship, to cooperate with State Apprenticeship Agencies (SAAs) engaged in formulating and promoting standards of apprenticeship, and to cooperate with the Secretary of Education in accordance with Section 17 of Title 20. Section 50a of the Act authorizes the Secretary of Labor to “publish information relating to existing and proposed labor standards of apprenticeship,” and to “appoint national advisory committees . . .” (29 U.S.C. 50a). The administration of the system is guided by Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), part 29, regulations that were updated in 2008 to address the 21st century workforce needs as well as enhance accountability of the recognized SAAs.
The DOL authorizes this information collection. This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number.
Interested parties are encouraged to provide comments to the contact shown in the
Submitted comments will also be a matter of public record for this ICR and posted on the internet, without redaction. The DOL encourages
The DOL is particularly interested in comments that:
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
1.
2.
A.
B.
1. Secretary's Order 02-2017 is superseded and canceled.
2. This Order does not affect Secretary's Order 14-2006, Internal Control Program (June 20, 2006).
3. Directives inconsistent with this Order are rescinded to the extent of the inconsistency.
3.
4.
5.
A. As required by the CFO Act, the CFO shall—
1. Report directly to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary regarding financial management matters;
2. Oversee all financial management activities relating to the programs and operations of the Department;
3. Develop and maintain an integrated Departmental accounting and financial management system, including financial reporting and internal controls, which—
a. Complies with applicable accounting principles, standards, and requirements, and internal control standards;
b. Complies with such policies and requirements as may be prescribed by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget;
c. Complies with any other requirements applicable to such systems; and
d. Provides for—
1. Complete, reliable, consistent, and timely information which is prepared on a uniform basis and which is responsive to the financial information needs of Departmental management;
2. The development and reporting of cost information;
3. The integration of accounting and budgeting information; and
4. The systematic measurement of financial performance.
4. Make recommendations to the Secretary regarding the selection of the Deputy Chief Financial Officer of the Department, who will have the qualifications outlined in the CFO Act at 31 U.S.C. 903;
5. Direct, manage, and provide policy guidance and oversight of Departmental financial management personnel, activities, and operations, including—
a. The preparation and annual revision of a Departmental plan to—
1. Implement the 5-year financial management plan prepared by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget under 31 U.S.C. 3512(a)(3); and
2. Comply with the requirements for financial statements and audits established under 31 U.S.C. 3515, 3521(e), and 3521(f);
b. The development of Departmental financial management budgets;
c. The recruitment, selection, and training of personnel to carry out Departmental financial management functions;
d. The approval and management of Departmental financial management systems design or enhancement projects;
e. The implementation of Departmental asset management systems, including systems for cash management, credit management, debt collection, and property and inventory management and control;
f. Prepare and transmit an annual report to the Secretary and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, consistent with the requirements of OMB Circular No. A-136, which shall include—
1. A description and analysis of the status of financial management of the Department;
2. The annual financial statements prepared under 31 U.S.C. 3515;
3. The audit report transmitted to the Secretary under 31 U.S.C. 3521(f);
4. A summary of the reports on internal accounting and administrative control systems submitted to the President and the Congress under the amendments made by the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act of 1982 (Pub. L. 97-255); and
5. Other information the Secretary considers appropriate to fully inform the President and the Congress concerning the financial management of the Department;
6. Monitor the financial execution of the budget of the Department in relation to actual expenditures and prepare and submit to the Secretary timely financial performance reports; and
7. Review, on a biennial basis, the fees, royalties, rents, and other charges imposed by the Department for services and things of value it provides, and make recommendations on revising those charges to reflect costs incurred by it in providing those services and things of value.
B. The CFO will have the following additional responsibilities:
1.
a. Monitor the financial execution of the budget of the Department in relation to actual expenditures, and prepare and submit to the Secretary timely financial performance reports.
b. Provide leadership, direction, coordination, and related services concerning budget execution for the Department and its component agencies.
c. Participate with Departmental Agency heads and other staff at a policy and decision-making level in the Departmental budget execution review process.
d. Review the budget requests for all Departmental and component agency financial management functions; recommend to the Secretary their modification as necessary to ensure that appropriate resources are requested to effectively and efficiently perform necessary financial and related functions.
e. Manage and oversee the Department's administrative control of funds from the time funds are allotted to the DOL agencies.
2.
a. Develop and promulgate accounting and financial management policies for DOL and its component agencies, and review and approve component agency financial policies, procedures, and structures for adherence to the policies of DOL and other Federal agencies.
b. Ensure compliance throughout DOL, and its component agencies, with applicable accounting standards and principles, and financial information and system functional standards, including the standards promulgated by the Federal Accounting Systems Advisory Board, the Federal Government's Standard General Ledger, the core requirements for financial systems, and the financial statement form and content guidance issued by OMB.
c. Exercise overall responsibility for the Department's compliance with FMFIA and for the Department's fiscal integrity; serve on the Department's Internal Control Board; report directly to the Secretary on internal control matters; carry out the responsibilities specified in Secretary's Order 14-2006, Internal Control Program, for the CFO and the Internal Control Principal for financial systems and mixed systems that are significantly financial.
d. Ensure adequate controls are in place over asset management, including cash management operations, credit management and debt collection operations, and real property, equipment, and inventories.
e. Participate with Departmental Agency heads and other staff in the policy review of proposed legislative and program initiatives from a financial management perspective.
f. Ensure that component agencies gather timely and accurate financial information to manage and oversee major procurements.
g. Develop policies and procedures for investigating potential violations of the Anti-Deficiency Act; working under policies established by the CFO, and in cooperation with the ASAM and the Solicitor of Labor, notify the Secretary of Anti-Deficiency Act violations, and transmit agency reports of Anti-Deficiency Act violations to the Secretary for transmittal to the President, Congress, OMB, and the Government Accountability Office, as applicable.
3.
a. Review and approve the design and operation of component agency financial, accounting, and asset systems, specifically including the financial aspects of grant management systems, debt collection systems, and other systems defined by FFMIA.
b. Provide oversight of, and issue core requirements and standards related to, component agency financial systems, activities, and operations, including preparation and revision of agency financial management plans and financial performance reports.
c. In coordination with the ASAM, establish policies, procedures, and other guidelines to prescribe the form, content, and frequency of accounting information to be reported from component agency systems to meet DOL and central Federal agency information requirements.
d. Participate in the review and approval process of information systems that provide, at least in part, financial and/or program performance data.
e. In consultation with the Chief Information Officer (CIO), ensure that the accounting, financial, asset management, and other information systems of the Department are designed, developed, maintained, and used effectively to provide financial or program performance data for financial statements of the Department.
f. Ensure, in consultation with the CIO, that program information systems provide financial, budget, and programmatic data on a reliable, consistent, and timely basis to agency financial management systems.
g. Recommend to the Secretary any information resource management and budget decisions affecting financial management processes, systems, and operations.
h. Consult with the CIO to ensure sufficient oversight and security exist to maintain the integrity of information systems that affect the preparation and presentation of the Department's financial statements.
4.
a. Prepare the financial management components of the annual Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) for transmittal to the Secretary and the Director of OMB. The PAR will meet the
1. A description and analysis of the status of financial management of the Department;
2. The Department's annual financial statements and accounting reports, including, where appropriate, pertinent performance measures;
3. The audit report transmitted to the Secretary;
4. The annual report required to be submitted to the President and the Congress under the FMFIA;
5. The report required by the Improper Payments Information Act;
6. The Management Assurance Statement required by OMB Circular No. A-123;
7. The annual financial management report required by the Chief Financial Officers Act; and
8. Other information the Secretary considers appropriate to fully inform the President and the Congress concerning the financial management of the Department.
b. Prepare the semi-annual audit resolution reports required by the Amendments to the Inspector General Act.
c. Coordinate and manage financial management reporting requirements as may be imposed by OMB, the Department of the Treasury, other central Federal agencies, and Congress.
d. In coordination with the ASAM and Agency heads, develop reporting mechanisms that integrate program performance and financial data, and facilitate the display of such data in budget documents, financial statements, and other pertinent communications.
e. In consultation with the CIO, ensure financial statements support:
1. Assessments and revisions of mission-related and administrative processes of the Department; and
2. Measurement of the performance of investments made by the Department in information systems.
5.
a. Provide oversight of, and issue core requirements and standards related to, component agency financial management personnel.
b. Provide policy advice and assistance to DOL executives, including component agency heads, on all personnel matters affecting financial management personnel throughout the DOL and its component agencies, and on budget and staffing levels for component agency financial functions.
c. Review all proposed personnel selections, skill requirements, performance standards, and position descriptions for financial management personnel at the GS-15 level and above throughout the DOL and its component agencies; discuss any problems with the component agency head and appeal any unresolved issue to the Secretary through the Deputy Secretary.
d. Manage a comprehensive training and development program for budget analysts, accountants, financial managers, and financial technicians; ensure that staff skills are commensurate with requirements; and implement a Continuing Professional Education (or similar) program.
6.
a. Manage Departmental programs on audit resolution, travel management, cash management, debt collection, asset management, and financial management activities.
b. Manage centralized Departmental accounting functions for fund and cost accounting, capitalized assets accounting, grant accounting, DOL employee compensation and benefits, and voucher, commercial bill, and other payments.
c. Exercise Departmental approval authority over interagency transactions involving component agency program funds, such as for investment or transfer.
d. Establish and chair a CFO Advisory Council within DOL to provide a forum for component organizations to advise and support the CFO in matters affecting the financial community. The Advisory Council will facilitate the dissemination of financial policies established by the CFO to component agencies.
e. Execute a Working Capital Fund (WCF), formulated by the ASAM, and related accounts offering, as appropriate and advantageous to the Department, a comprehensive program of centralized services funded by customer agency reimbursements in advance.
f. Provide technical reviews of finance offices in the DOL and its component agencies, and oversee component agency financial systems as defined in the FFMIA.
g. Appraise centralized and decentralized operations and organizations to determine more effective and cost-efficient methods of performing required financial functions.
h. Serve as the Department's Improper Payment Reduction Coordinator, with responsibilities including, but not limited to:
1. Coordinating the establishment of policies and procedures for assessing Departmental, component agency, and program risks of improper payments;
2. Coordinating Departmental, component agency, and program management actions to reduce improper payments. These duties include:
i. Assigning responsibility for specific areas of improper payment-related activities to appropriate component agency, program, or activity officials;
ii. Coordinating the development of detailed action plans to determine the nature and extent of possible improper payments for all DOL programs and activities spending Federal funds;
iii. Assisting component agency and program management in identifying cost-effective control activities to address identified risk areas;
iv. Assisting component agency and program management in establishing improper payment reduction goals or targets and measuring performance against those goals to determine progress made and areas needing additional action;
v. Developing procedures for working with OMB and the Congress to address barriers encountered that inhibit actions to reduce improper payments; and
vi. Coordinating periodic reporting, through publicly available documents, to the Secretary, OMB, and the Congress on the progress made in achieving improper payment reduction targets and future action plans for controlling improper payments.
3. Providing a quarterly status report to the Deputy Secretary on Departmental activities to identify and reduce improper payments.
C. In addition to the authority otherwise provided in this Order, the CFO—
1. Shall have access to all records, reports, audits, reviews, documents, papers, recommendations, or other materials which are the property of the Department or which are available to the Department, and which relate to programs and operations with respect to which the CFO has responsibilities;
2. May request such information or assistance as may be necessary for carrying out the duties and responsibilities provided by this Order from any Federal, State, or local governmental entity; and
3. To the extent and in such amounts as may be provided in advance by appropriations Acts, may—
a. Enter into contracts and other arrangements with public agencies and with private persons for the preparation of financial statements, studies, analyses, and other services; and
b. Make such payments as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Order.
6.
A. Unless modified by this Order, the heads of component Agencies retain
1. In consultation with the CFO and the CIO, define program information needs and develop strategies, systems, and capabilities to meet those needs.
2. Perform transaction and operational level financial functions in accordance with policies, requirements, and procedures established by the CFO.
3. Direct financial staffs and functions in their respective component agencies consistent with those policies and procedures established by the CFO.
4. Facilitate the CFO's oversight responsibilities with respect to financial operations and component agency program financial systems by providing and maintaining system documentation, audit trails, summary or detailed transaction data, and such other information as the CFO may require.
5. Fully solicit, consider, and cooperate with the CFO in the review of proposed appointment, promotion, and other personnel actions affecting financial management staff at the GS-15 level and above.
6. Manage grants, procurement, property, debt management/accounts receivable, and other management systems for their respective component agencies, in a manner consistent with the CFO's responsibilities prescribed in this Order.
B. The Inspector General—
1. Retains full responsibility for previously-delegated budget and financial management activities pertaining to his or her own office, but will participate with the CFO in integrating such delegated assignments with the overall financial management program of the Department.
2. Will participate, where appropriate, in joint reviews with the CFO of selected financial management functions, operations, and systems.
3. Will participate with the CFO in the resolution of audit issues, findings, and recommendations, including those involved in the annual financial statements, consistent with its statutory responsibilities for managing an audit program.
C. The Solicitor of Labor is responsible for providing legal advice and assistance to the Secretary, Deputy Secretary, CFO, and all other Department of Labor officials who are assigned responsibilities for implementation of this Order, except as provided in Secretary's Order 4-2006 with respect to the Office of Inspector General.
7.
8.
A. Unless otherwise stated in this Order, the submission of reports and recommendations to the President and the Congress concerning the administration of statutory or administrative provisions is reserved to the Secretary.
B. Except as provided in Paragraph (5)(D)(1), this Order does not provide to the CFO any access greater than permitted under any other law to records, reports, audits, reviews, documents, papers, recommendations, or other material of the Office of Inspector General.
9.
10.
1.
2.
A. This Order repeals and supersedes Secretary's Order 03-2017 (Delegation and Assignment of Responsibilities to the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management).
B. The following Secretary's Order is referenced herein and remains in effect: 2-2009 (Delegation of Authority and Assignment of Responsibility to the Chief Acquisition Officer and Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management, and Related Matters).
C. This Order does not affect the authorities and responsibilities assigned by any other Secretary's Order, including without limitation 9-1989 (Data Integrity Board), 5-2001 (MRB), 1-2006 (Emergency Management) and 6-2006 (Regional Executive Committees), unless otherwise expressly so provided in this or another Order.
3.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
1. Voluntary Health and Wellness Programs:
a.
b.
c.
2.
K.
L.
M.
4.
5.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
M.
6.
A.
1. Issuing policy guidance and instructions to prepare the Department's performance budgets for internal decision-making, for OMB, and for the Congress.
2. Reviewing and analyzing agency budget requests to the Department.
3. Reviewing, analyzing, consolidating and packaging all
4. Coordinating all information developed in support of budget requests to OMB and to Congress.
5. Providing staff support in preparing lead Departmental representations for press briefings and Congressional hearings on the Department's budget.
6. Assisting the Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs in coordinating the preparation of briefing materials for the Secretary and Agency heads.
7. Issuing policy guidance and instructions on the preparation of apportionments.
8. Formulates an annual operating plan and agency allocations for a Working Capital Fund that:
a. Ensures customer agencies access to meaningful information on the full costs of those centralized services, conditions for usage, and the cost allocation formulas employed in the lawful distribution of annual charges against the respective agency appropriation accounts; and
b. Ensures, through the creation and regular convening of a Working Capital Fund Committee, the opportunities for meaningful and informed customer agency participation or representation in reviewing WCF activities, costs, and charges, and in recommending changes or improvements to the ASAM.
c. Is operated on the basis of agency reimbursement agreements between customers and service providers and timely cost assessments and related adjustments for services provided or offered.
B.
1. Overseeing the preparation of the Department's strategic plans, performance plans, and performance reports consistent with statutory and OMB requirements and directions.
2. Directing the preparation of responses to OIG reports regarding top management challenges.
3. Soliciting, procuring, and overseeing studies by independent entities evaluating the impact and effectiveness of Departmental programs.
C.
1. Serving as the Designated Agency Safety and Health Official (DASHO) pursuant to section 1-201(c) of Executive Order 12196, and, as such, directing the establishment, administration, and management of the Department's programs regarding safety and occupational health and workers' compensation consistent with applicable law.
2. Ensuring appropriate policy development, planning, implementation, coordination, and evaluation of the Department-wide safety, occupational health and workers' compensation program; securing the services of full-time professional staff qualified to provide technical assistance and training in the areas of safety (including ergonomics), industrial hygiene, and workers' compensation, and return-to-work services.
3. Ensuring that the Department's Office of Worker Safety and Health provides operational safety and occupational health services to agencies within the Department that do not perform these functions internally.
D.
1. Serving as the Department's Senior Real Property Officer (SRPO) and, as such, developing policy and implementing an asset management planning process that meets the form, content, and other requirements established by the Federal Real Property Council (FRPC).
2. As SRPO, monitoring the real property assets of the Department so that Departmental assets are managed consistent with the goals and objectives set forth in the Department's strategic plan prepared pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 306, the principles developed by the FRPC, and reflected in the Department's asset management plan, and such other duties and responsibilities incumbent upon the SRPO.
3. Consistent with legal authorities, including agreements and other arrangements with the General Services Administration and with other applicable lease documents relating to buildings in which the Department is the primary tenant, assuring the operation and maintenance of the Frances Perkins Building and other Departmental buildings in which the Department is the primary tenant—or has received delegated authority from the General Services Administration for operations and maintenance—including making arrangements for appropriate cleaning, utilities, fire and life safety arrangements, security arrangements, office space assignments, any parking areas (including space assignments), mail service, duplication services, building space alterations, and any abatement work as appropriate.
E.
1. Developing policy and directives for the Department of Labor regarding compliance with the accessibility requirements of the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 and any regulations promulgated pursuant to that Act.
2. Monitoring, investigating, and enforcing the provisions of the statute and regulations mentioned in Paragraph 5.E., above, with respect to the accessibility of buildings and facilities constructed, altered, or renovated by, on behalf of, or for the use of a recipient of Federal financial assistance, except for those facilities referred to in Paragraph 7.A., below relating to the Employment and Training Administration.
3. Serving as the Department's Accessibility Compliance Officer.
F.
G.
1. In consultation with the Chief Information Officer (CIO) and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), establishing, administering, and managing the Department's Records Management Program.
2. Periodically evaluating the Department's Records Management Program to ensure that the Department's component agencies are in compliance with relevant Federal records management laws, regulations, and procedures related to the creation, maintenance and use, and disposition of Federal records, and agency recordkeeping requirements. Evaluations shall be scheduled to cover all agencies on a five-year cycle on an on-going basis. Records management program evaluations shall assess the effective implementation of the basic components of a records management program, as prescribed by NARA regulations and policies.
3. Assigning a Departmental Records Officer who will manage the day-to-day administration and management of all matters related to the Department's Records Management Program. The Departmental Records Officer shall be responsible for all matters related to the Department's Records Management Program and will coordinate with the National Archives and Records Administration.
H.
1. Overseeing the operation of a headquarters printing service and determining the duplicating and printing for the Department and its agencies, including making arrangements for scheduling and delivery to meet Departmental needs and notifying agencies of changes in printing operations.
2. Formulating policy and supervising operations relating to Departmental printing, duplicating, copying,
3. Implementing and guiding enforcement within the Department of all Government printing, binding, duplication, and related laws and regulations.
4. Exclusively representing, directly or through a delegee, the Department with the Joint Committee on Printing on all matters pertaining to printing.
5. Exercising technical control over all copying, printing, binding, publishing, and related or auxiliary equipment and serving as the technical or final approving authority for all requests.
I.
1. Serving as the Department's Environmental Executive and, as such, providing management oversight of all Department environmental programs, including ensuring compliance with relevant Executive Orders, and coordinating such efforts with the Chief Acquisition Officer.
2. Establishing model facility demonstration programs that include comprehensive waste reduction and recycling programs and emphasizing the procurement of recycled materials and environmentally preferable products and services.
3. Designating a Department of Labor Recycling Coordinator who shall be responsible for: (a) Coordinating the development of an effective agency waste reduction and recycling program, and the affirmative procurement plan developed in accordance with OFPP guidelines, (b) coordinating Departmental action to develop benefits, costs, and savings data to measure the effectiveness of the DOL program, and (c) coordinating the development of reports required by Executive Order and OFPP policy.
J.
K.
L.
M.
1. Providing appropriate services to the child care providers located in the FPB, the BLS building, and at any regional buildings where child care services are provided within Departmental offices.
2. Establishing, administering, and managing the Department's child care subsidy program in accordance with all statutory, regulatory, and administrative requirements.
N.
1. The ASAM will work in consultation and coordination with, as appropriate, the other Departmental officials who have authority and responsibility in the areas addressed by this order, including without limitation, the Chief Acquisition Officer, the Chief Human Capital Officer, the Chief Information Officer, and the Chief Financial Officer.
2. The ASAM will perform any additional duties that are assigned to the ASAM by applicable law or regulation.
7.
A. The Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training is delegated authority and assigned responsibility, in accordance with the policies and standards established by the ASAM, for monitoring, investigating, and enforcing the laws referred to in paragraph 3.D., above, with respect to buildings and facilities that are financed in whole or in part by Employment and Training Administration (“ETA”) grants or loans and that are subject to standards for design, construction or alteration issued by ETA under the laws authorizing such grant or loan.
B. Agency Heads are delegated authority and assigned responsibility for:
1.
a. In accordance with established policies and guidelines, developing agency budget proposals for the budget years for consideration during the internal decision process and for the Department's submission to OMB based on the Secretary's decisions.
b. Providing information in support of budget proposals, through the ASAM or identified designee, for the OMB submission and Budget Justifications for Congress.
c. Ensuring information provided in the agency budget is consistent with the Department's strategic plan and performance requirements.
d. Meeting with OMB staff and testifying before Congress to expand upon and answer questions pertaining to the Department's budget request in support of their respective agency programs.
2.
3.
a. Giving full management support to the Department's safety, occupational health, and workers' compensation program as provided in this Order and assuring that identified hazards are abated.
b. Operating occupational safety and occupational health programs in their national and field offices in accordance with applicable statutory, regulatory, administrative, and contractual requirements.
c. Appointing and arranging training for sufficient numbers of staff members throughout their organizations to perform collateral or full-time safety/occupational health duties and to serve on safety/occupational health committees to assist managers, employees, and full-time safety/health staff in the implementation of the responsibilities outlined in this Order.
d. Providing documentation of attainment of the Department's annual safety/health and workers' compensation program goals developed to reduce employee accidents, injuries, and illnesses, and contain workers' compensation costs.
e. Holding managers, supervisors, and employees accountable for their adherence to established safety/health policies, rules, regulations, and
f. Providing employees appropriate personal protective and safety/occupational health equipment.
g. Conducting analyses of Agency jobs and ensuring that all workplaces are surveyed to identify and eliminate or minimize possible ergonomic risk factors.
h. Acquiring, to the extent practicable, tools, equipment, and computer accessory furniture that is adjustable and adaptable to those using them.
i. Assuring that agency employees participate in educational and training experiences necessary to carry out their assigned duties in a safe and healthful manner.
j. Assuring, through partnership with appropriate unions, that employee representatives have the opportunity to participate in educational training experiences necessary to carry out their responsibilities.
4.
5.
a. Developing and implementing effective Records Management Programs within their respective organizations that are consistent with Departmental policy and directives.
b. Assigning an Agency Records Officer for the management and execution of the Agency's Records Management Program.
c. Ensuring that the appropriate Agency staff receives adequate records management training and participates in Departmental as well as Agency training and awareness activities.
6.
7.
a. Promoting waste reduction and recycling of reusable materials within their agencies;
b. Requiring consideration of the following factors in acquisition planning for all agency procurement actions, and in the evaluation and award of contracts: Elimination of virgin material requirements; use of recovered materials; reuse of products; life cycle costs; recyclability; environmental preferability; waste prevention; and ultimate disposal, if appropriate;
c. Developing and implementing an agency plan for energy conservation through changes in procurement practices, investment in energy efficient technology, and reduction of demand;
d. Designating an Agency Recycling Coordinator to coordinate the development of an effective agency waste reduction and recycling program, and emphasize agency purchase and use of recycled and environmentally preferable products and services;
e. Providing data and information on agency activity for incorporation into Departmental reports;
f. Designating facility energy supervisors in Department-operated facilities and ensuring a sufficient number of trained energy managers throughout the Department to implement the provisions of law and regulation relating to energy and water conservation;
g. Where programs include a project or activity involving construction or leasing of property, ensuring that the responsible program manager conducts an environmental assessment; and, analyzes findings of environmental assessments and makes final decisions regarding the significance of environmental consequences;
8.
9.
a. Establishing agency procedures necessary to carry out the provisions of the law, regulation, and Departmental directives relating to commercial services management.
b. Designating an agency official as the central point of contact for commercial services management and ensuring the timely and appropriate completion of required activities and notices.
8.
9.
A. The submission of reports and recommendations to the President and the Congress is reserved to the Secretary.
B. This Secretary's Order does not affect the authorities and responsibilities of the Office of Inspector General under the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, or under Secretary's Order 4-2006.
10.
11.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Draft regulatory guide; extension of comment period.
On May 14, 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) solicited comments on Draft Regulatory Guide (DG), DG-5048, “Standard Format and Content of Physical Security Plans, Training and Qualifications Plans, and Safeguards Contingency Plans for Nuclear Power Plants.” The public comment period was originally scheduled to close on July 13, 2018. The NRC has decided to extend the public comment period by 30 days to allow more time for members of the public to develop and submit their comments.
The due date for comments requested in the document published on May 14, 2018 (83 FR 22297), is extended. Comments should be filed no later than August 13, 2018. Comments received after this date will be considered, if it is practical to do so, but
You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
Dennis Gordon, Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response, telephone: 301-287-3633, email:
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0092 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this action. You may obtain publically-available information related to this action, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0092 in your comment submission. The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.
On May 14, 2018 (83 FR 22297), the NRC solicited comments on DG-5048, “Standard Format and Content of Physical Security Plans, Training and Qualifications Plans, and Safeguards Contingency Plans for Nuclear Power Plants” (ADAMS Accession No. ML17124A490). The public comment period was originally scheduled to end on July 13, 2018. On May 14, 2018, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) requested that the comment period be extended, stating that “the change would allow NEI and its members' sufficient time to perform a thorough review of the document consistent with other work priorities” (ADAMS Accesion No. ML18136A546). The NRC agreed to the request because of the length and comprehensiveness of this DG. Accordingly, the NRC is extending the public comment period on this document until August 13, 2018, to allow more time for members of the public to submit their comments.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Exemption and combined license amendment; issuance.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued an exemption to allow a departure from the certification information of Tier 1 of the generic design control document and issued License Amendment Nos. 108 and 107 to Combined License (COL) Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92, respectively. The COLs were issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., and Georgia Power Company; Oglethorpe Power Corporation; MEAG Power SPVM, LLC; MEAG Power SPVJ, LLC; MEAG Power SPVP, LLC; and the City of Dalton, Georgia (the licensee), for construction and operation of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Units 3 and 4, located in Burke County, Georgia.
The granting of the exemption allows the changes to Tier 1 information asked for in the amendment. Because the acceptability of the exemption was determined in part by the acceptability of the amendment, the exemption and amendment are being issued concurrently.
The exemption and amendment were issued on February 1, 2018.
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2008-0252 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Chandu Patel, Office of New Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3025; email:
The NRC is granting an exemption from paragraph B of section III, “Scope and Contents,” of appendix D, “Design Certification Rule for the AP1000,” to part 52 of title 10 of the
Part of the justification for granting the exemption was provided by the review of the amendment. Because the exemption was necessary in order to issue the requested license amendment, the NRC granted the exemption and issued the amendment concurrently, rather than in sequence. This included issuing a combined safety evaluation containing the NRC staff's review of both the exemption request and the license amendment. The exemption met all applicable regulatory criteria set forth in sections 50.12 and 52.7 of 10 CFR, and section VIII.A.4 of appendix D to 10 CFR part 52. The license amendment was found to be acceptable as well. The combined safety evaluation is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18011A894.
Identical exemption documents (except for referenced unit numbers and license numbers) were issued to the licensee for VEGP, Units 3 and 4 (COL Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92). The exemption documents for VEGP, Units 3 and 4, can be found in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML18011A888 and ML18011A889, respectively. The exemption is reproduced (with the exception of abbreviated titles and additional citations) in Section II of this document. The amendment documents for COL Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92 are available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML18011A890 and ML18011A891, respectively. A summary of the amendment documents is provided in Section III of this document.
Reproduced below is the exemption document issued to VEGP, Units 3 and Unit 4. It makes reference to the combined safety evaluation that provides the reasoning for the findings made by the NRC (and listed under Item 1) in order to grant the exemption:
1. In a letter dated May 9, 2017, as supplemented by letter dated September 15, 2017, Southern Nuclear Operating Company requested from the Commission an exemption to allow departures from Tier 1 information in the certified design control document incorporated by reference in 10 CFR part 52, appendix D, as part of license amendment request 17-001, “Main Control Room Emergency Habitability System Changes to Satisfy Post-Actuation Performance Requirements.”
For the reasons set forth in Section 3.1 of the NRC staff's safety evaluation, the Commission finds that:
A. The exemption is authorized by law;
B. The exemption presents no undue risk to public health and safety;
C. The exemption is consistent with the common defense and security;
D. Special circumstances are present in that the application of the rule in this circumstance is not necessary to serve the underlying purpose of the rule;
E. The special circumstances outweigh any decrease in safety that may result from the reduction in standardization caused by the exemption; and
F. The exemption will not result in a significant decrease in the level of safety otherwise provided by the design.
2. Accordingly, the licensee is granted an exemption from the certified design control document Tier 1 information, with corresponding changes to Appendix C of the Facility Combined License, as described in the request dated May 9, 2017, as supplemented by letter dated September 15, 2017. This exemption is related to, and necessary for the granting of License Amendment No. 108 [for Unit 3 and No. 107 for Unit 4], which is being issued concurrently with this exemption.
3. As explained in Section 5.0 of the NRC staff's safety evaluation, this exemption meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment needs to be prepared in connection with the issuance of the exemption.
4. This exemption is effective as of the date of its issuance.
By letter dated May 9, 2017, as supplemented by letter dated September 15, 2017, the licensee requested that the NRC amend the COLs for VEGP, Units 3 and 4, COL Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92. The proposed amendment is described in Section I of this
The Commission has determined for these amendments that the application complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.
A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility operating license or COL, as applicable, proposed no significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing in connection with these actions, was published in the
The Commission has determined that these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared for these amendments.
Using the reasons set forth in the combined safety evaluation, the staff granted the exemptions and issued the amendments that the licensee requested on May 9, 2017, as supplemented by letter dated September 15, 2017.
The exemptions and amendments were issued on February 1, 2018, as part of a combined package to the licensee (ADAMS Accession No. ML18011A885).
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Regulatory guide; issuance.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing Revision 4 to Regulatory Guide (RG) 8.7, “Instructions for Recording and Reporting Occupational Radiation Dose Data.” Revision 4 addresses issues that were identified after Revision 3 was issued in December 2016. Revision 4 reinstates the long-standing staff position concerning a licensee's consideration of prior occupational dose when making prospective occupational dose monitoring determinations. Revision 4 retains the guidance from Revision 3 on completing NRC Form 4, “Cumulative Occupational Dose History,” and NRC Form 5, “Occupational Dose Record for a Monitoring Period.”
Revision 4 to RG 8.7 is available on May 29, 2018.
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0205 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
RGs are not copyrighted, and NRC approval is not required to reproduce them.
Harriet Karagiannis, telephone: 301-415-2493, email:
The NRC is issuing a revision to an existing guide in the NRC's “Regulatory Guide” series. This series was developed to describe and make available to the public information regarding methods that are acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing specific parts of the NRC's regulations, techniques that the NRC staff uses in evaluating specific issues or postulated events, and data that the NRC staff needs in its review of applications for permits and licenses.
Revision 4 of RG 8.7 was issued with a temporary identification of Draft Regulatory Guide, DG-8056, to address issues identified by the NRC staff and other stakeholders subsequent to the issuance of RG 8.7, Revision 3, on December 8, 2016 (81 FR 88710). Revision 3 modified a staff position regarding the consideration of prior occupational dose and whether that should be a factor in licensee occupational monitoring determinations in accordance with section 20.1502 of title 10 of the
After issuing Revision 3, the Nuclear Energy Institute submitted a letter to the NRC under ADAMS Package Accession No. ML18138A166 stating that Revision 3 requires licensees to consider exposures received by employees during prior employment at a different facility when determining whether monitoring is required pursuant to 10 CFR 20.1502, which was a change in agency position from: (1) The staff position that was in both Revisions 1 and 2 of RG 8.7, (2) the staff position that is in RG 8.34, “Monitoring Criteria and Methods to Calculate Occupational Radiation Doses,” and (3) over two decades of industry practice developed in accordance with these staff positions.
The NRC staff decided to issue Revision 4 to RG 8.7 to address the monitoring issues that were identified after Revision 3 was issued. The staff, however, is not rescinding Revision 3 because it allows a more conservative option for those licensees who want to consider prior occupational dose when making 10 CFR 20.1502 determinations. Revision 4 also retains the guidance from Revision 3 on completing NRC Form 4 and NRC Form 5.
DG-8056 was published in the
This RG is a rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808). However, the Office of Management and Budget has not found it to be a major rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act.
This RG addresses compliance with the NRC's requirements in 10 CFR part 20 to record and report an individual's cumulative occupational dose history and the occupational dose received by an individual for a specific monitoring period. The NRC regards these requirements as constituting information collection and reporting requirements. The NRC has long taken the position that information collection
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
License amendment application; withdrawal by applicant.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has granted the request of FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company to withdraw its application dated December 20, 2017, for a proposed amendment to the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit. No. 1, Facility Operating License No. NPF-58. The proposed amendment would have modified the facility technical specifications (TSs) pertaining to direct current electrical systems, specifically limiting conditions for operation 3.8.4, 3.8.5, and 3.8.6. The proposed amendment would have also added a new Battery and Monitoring Maintenance Program to TS Section 5.5, “Programs and Manuals.”
May 29, 2018.
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0021 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Kimberly Green, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1627, email:
The NRC has granted the request of FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (the licensee) to withdraw its December 20, 2017, application (ADAMS Accession No. ML17355A019) for proposed amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-58 for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1, located in Lake County, Ohio.
The proposed amendment would have revised TS requirements related to direct current electrical systems, specifically limiting conditions for operation 3.8.4, 3.8.5, and 3.8.6. The amendment would have also added a new Battery and Monitoring Maintenance Program to TS Section 5.5, “Programs and Manuals.”
The Commission had previously issued a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment published in the
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated December 20, 2017, and the licensee's letter dated May 14, 2018, which withdrew the application for license amendment.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
In accordance with the purposes of Sections 29 and 182b of the Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039, 2232b), the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will hold meetings on June 6-8, 2018, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the
Thirty-five hard copies of each presentation or handout should be provided 30 minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic copy of each presentation should be emailed to the Cognizant ACRS Staff one day before meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be provided within this timeframe, presenters should provide the Cognizant ACRS Staff with a CD containing each presentation at least 30 minutes before the meeting.
In accordance with Subsection 10(d) of Public Law 92-463 and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), certain portions of this meeting may be closed, as specifically noted above. Use of still, motion picture, and television cameras during the meeting may be limited to selected portions of the meeting as determined by the Chairman. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during the open portions of the meeting.
ACRS meeting agendas, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room at
Video teleconferencing service is available for observing open sessions of ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use this service should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACRS Audio Visual Technician (301-415-6702), between 7:30 a.m. and 3:45 p.m. (ET), at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure the availability of this service. Individuals or organizations requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they use to establish the video teleconferencing link. The availability of video teleconferencing services is not guaranteed.
This notice is late due to the adjustment of accurate meeting topics for APR1400. Specifically, the related Subcommittees which occurred in late May affected the schedule.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
9:30 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. on Thursday, June 7, 2018.
The Commission's National Office at One Lafayette Centre, 1120 20th Street NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20036-3457.
The oral arguments will be open to the public.
At 9:30 a.m., the Commission will be hearing oral argument in the case of
John X. Cerveny, Executive Secretary, (202) 606-5400.
Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC).
Notice and request for comments.
Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, agencies are required to publish a Notice in the
Comments must be received within thirty (30) calendar days of publication of this notice.
Mail all comments and requests for copies of the subject form to OPIC's Agency Submitting Officer: James Bobbitt, Overseas Private Investment Corporation, 1100 New York Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20527. See
OPIC Agency Submitting Officer: James Bobbitt, (202) 336-8558.
OPIC received comments in response to the sixty (60) day notice published in
Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC).
Notice and request for comments.
Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, agencies are required to publish a Notice in the
Comments must be received within thirty (30) calendar days of publication of this notice.
Mail all comments and requests for copies of the subject form to OPIC's Agency Submitting Officer: James Bobbitt, Overseas Private Investment Corporation, 1100 New York Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20527. See
OPIC Agency Submitting Officer: James Bobbitt, (202) 336-8558.
OPIC received no comments in response to the sixty (60) day notice published in
President's Commission on White House Fellowships, Office of Personnel Management.
Notice of meeting.
The President's Commission on White House Fellowships (PCWHF) was established by an Executive Order in 1964. The PCWHF is an advisory committee composed of Special Government Employees appointed by the President. The Advisory Committee meets in June to interview potential candidates for recommendation to become a White House Fellow.
The meeting is closed.
Elizabeth D. Pinkerton, 712 Jackson Place NW, Washington, DC 20503, Phone: 202-395-4522.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
CHX proposes a rule change in connection with a transaction (“Transaction”) whereby a wholly-owned subsidiary of NYSE Group, Inc. (“NYSE Group”) would merge with and into the Exchange's parent, CHX Holdings, Inc. (“CHX Holdings”), with CHX Holdings continuing as the surviving corporation (“Merger”). Pursuant to the Transaction, the Exchange and CHX Holdings would become indirect subsidiaries of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (“ICE”).
In connection with the proposed Transaction, the Exchange proposes to (a) amend the governing documents of the Exchange and CHX Holdings; (b) adopt organizational documents of NYSE Group, NYSE Holdings LLC (“NYSE Holdings”), Intercontinental Exchange Holdings, Inc. (“ICE Holdings”), and ICE as rules of the Exchange; and (c) amend Article 2, Article 19 and Article 22 of the CHX Rules.
• The text of the proposed Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (“CHX Certificate”) and proposed Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (“CHX Bylaws”) is attached as Exhibits 5A and 5B, respectively. The text of the proposed Second Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of CHX Holdings, Inc. (“CHX Holdings Certificate”) and proposed Second Amended and Restated Bylaws of CHX Holdings, Inc. (“CHX Holdings Bylaws”) is attached as Exhibits 5C and 5D, respectively.
• The text of the Seventh Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of NYSE Group, Inc. (“NYSE Group Certificate”) and Fourth Amended and Restated Bylaws of NYSE Group, Inc. (“NYSE Group Bylaws”) is attached as Exhibits 5E and 5F, respectively. The text of the Ninth Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of NYSE Holdings LLC (“NYSE Holdings Operating Agreement”) is attached as Exhibit 5G. The text of the Ninth Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Intercontinental Exchange Holdings, Inc. (“ICE Holdings Certificate”) and Sixth Amended and Restated Bylaws of Intercontinental Exchange Holdings, Inc. (“ICE Holdings Bylaws”) are attached as Exhibits 5H and 5I, respectively. The text of the Fourth Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (“ICE Certificate”), Eighth Amended and Restated Bylaws of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (“ICE Bylaws”) and Independence Policy of the Board of Directors of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (“ICE Independence Policy”) is attached as Exhibits 5J, 5K, and 5L, respectively.
• The proposed changes to CHX Article 2, Rules 2 (Executive Committee), 3 (Finance Committee), 4 (Regulatory Oversight Committee), and 11 (Nominating and Governance Committee) and CHX Article 19, Rule 2 (Routing Brokers), as well as proposed new CHX Article 22, Rule 28 (Additional Requirements for Listed Securities Issued by Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. or its Affiliates), are attached as Exhibit 5M, and the text of resolutions of the Board of Directors of CHX Holdings dated April 25, 2018 to waive certain ownership and voting limitations to permit the Transaction (“Resolutions”) is attached as Exhibit 5N.
As discussed below, the Exchange proposes that the above rule changes would become operative simultaneously with the Merger that effectuates the Transaction (“Closing”), with the exception that the proposed addition of new Section XII to the CHX Holdings Bylaws would become operative immediately before the Closing.
The text of this proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
The Exchange proposes a rule change in connection with the Transaction whereby a wholly-owned subsidiary of NYSE Group would merge with and into the Exchange's parent, CHX Holdings, with CHX Holdings continuing as the surviving corporation. Pursuant to the Transaction, the Exchange and CHX Holdings would become indirect subsidiaries of ICE.
Following the Transaction, the Exchange would continue to be registered as a national securities exchange and as a separate self-regulatory organization (“SRO”). As such, the Exchange would continue to have separate rules, membership rosters, and listings that would be distinct from the rules, membership rosters, and listings of the four other registered national securities exchanges and SROs owned by NYSE Group, namely, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE”), NYSE American LLC (“NYSE American”), NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca”), and NYSE National, Inc. (“NYSE National” and together with the NYSE, NYSE American and NYSE Arca, the “NYSE Exchanges”).
The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change presents no novel issues, as all of the proposed rule text is based on existing rules of the NYSE Exchanges or, in the case of the proposed amendments to the CHX Holdings Bylaws, the Exchange.
Since 2005, CHX has been a wholly-owned subsidiary of CHX Holdings.
CHX Holdings is beneficially owned by 197 firms or individuals, including Participants
CHX Holdings is the sole member of CHXBD, LLC (“CHXBD”), the Exchange's affiliated routing broker. CHXBD is a facility (as defined in Section 3(a)(2) of the Exchange Act)
NYSE Group is a wholly-owned subsidiary of NYSE Holdings, which is in turn wholly owned by ICE Holdings. ICE Holdings is wholly-owned by ICE.
CHX Holdings, ICE and Kondor Merger Sub, Inc. (“Merger Sub”), entered into a Merger Agreement dated April 4, 2018 (“Merger Agreement”). Merger Sub is a wholly-owned subsidiary of NYSE Group. Pursuant to the Merger Agreement, at the Closing, Merger Sub would merge with and into CHX Holdings, and CHX Holdings would be the entity surviving the Merger. Current holders of the common and preferred stock of CHX Holdings would receive cash in exchange for their shares.
Upon Closing, NYSE Group will hold all of the outstanding and issued shares of CHX Holdings, and CHX Holdings will continue to be the record and beneficial owner of all of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of CHX and the sole member of CHXBD. Closing is subject to satisfaction of customary conditions for a transaction of this nature, including approval of this proposed rule change by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”).
Moreover, upon the Closing, Archipelago Securities, LLC (“ArcaSec”), a Participant of the Exchange and wholly-owned subsidiary of NYSE Group, will become an affiliate of the Exchange. CHX Article 3, Rule 20 (Non Affiliation between Exchange and any Participant) provides, in pertinent part, that a Participant shall not be or become an affiliate of the Exchange, or an affiliate of any affiliate of the Exchange, in the absence of an effective filing under Section 19(b) of the Exchange Act.
As discussed in further detail below, to effectuate the change in the ownership structure in connection with the proposed Transaction, the Exchange proposes the following:
• The CHX Holdings Certificate includes certain restrictions on the ownership and voting of shares of CHX Holdings (the “Ownership and Voting Limitations”).
• The Exchange proposes amendments to the CHX Certificate and CHX Bylaws that would conform the Exchange's governance provisions regarding the composition, election and terms of the Exchange Board to those of other NYSE Exchanges. These proposed changes would be operative upon Closing.
• The Exchange proposes amendments to the CHX Holdings Certificate and CHX Holdings Bylaws that would make the governing documents of the Exchange's direct parent, CHX Holdings, consistent with those of NYSE Group, NYSE Holdings, ICE Holdings, and ICE (together, the “ICE Holding Companies”). These proposed changes would be operative upon Closing.
• The Exchange proposes to amend CHX Article 2, Rules 2, 3, 4, and 11, to reflect proposed changes to the CHX Bylaws and CHX Certificate. These proposed changes would be operative upon Closing.
Article FIFTH of the CHX Holdings Certificate provides that that no Person,
1. Own shares of stock of CHX Holdings representing more than 40 percent of the then outstanding votes entitled to be cast on any matter.
2. If it is a Participant, own shares of stock of CHX Holdings representing more than 20 percent of the then outstanding votes entitled to be cast on any matter.
3. Pursuant to any voting trust, agreement, plan or other arrangement, vote or cause the voting of shares of the stock of CHX Holdings or give any consent or proxy with respect to shares representing more than 20 percent of the voting power of the then issued and outstanding capital stock of CHX Holdings; or enter into any agreement, plan or other arrangement (“Arrangement”) with any other Person, either alone or together with its Related Persons, under circumstances that would result in the subject shares of CHX Holdings not being voted on any matter or matters or any proxy relating thereto being withheld, where the effect of such Arrangement would be to enable any Person, either alone or together with its Related Persons, to vote, possess the right to vote or cause the voting of shares of CHX Holdings which would represent more than 20 percent of said voting power.
Because NYSE Group's acquisition of all the shares of CHX Holdings at Closing would violate these Ownership and Voting Limitations, the CHX Holdings Board (a) approved the Resolutions, and (b) proposes to add the Bylaw Waiver Amendment to the CHX Holdings Bylaws. So that the Bylaw Waiver Amendment and Resolutions may effectuate a waiver of the Ownership and Voting Limitations and thereby permit the Transaction, the Bylaw Waiver Amendment would be operative immediately before the Closing.
The CHX Holdings Certificate provides that the first and third Ownership and Voting Limitations set forth above may be waived by the CHX Holdings Board by adopting an amendment to the bylaws, if, in connection with the adoption of such amendment, the Board of Directors also adopts certain resolutions.
Accordingly, on April 25, 2018, the CHX Holdings Board adopted the following Resolutions:
1. That the Board has determined that the Bylaw Waiver Amendment, the (direct or indirect, as applicable) acquisition of the Proposed Share Ownership by each of the ICE Holding Companies and the (direct or indirect, as applicable) acquisition or (direct or indirect, as applicable) exercise of the Proposed Voting Rights by each of the ICE Holding Companies (i) will not impair the ability of the Exchange to carry out its functions and responsibilities as an “exchange” under the Exchange Act and the rules thereunder; (ii) are otherwise in the best interests of [CHX Holdings] and its stockholders and the Exchange; and (iii) will not impair the ability of the Commission to enforce the Exchange Act;
2. that the Board has considered the Merger Agreement and the Merger, the Proposed Share Ownership and Proposed Voting Rights of each of the
3. that the Board hereby approves and directs that the Amendments, including the Bylaw Waiver Amendment,
4. that the Board hereby determines that the execution and delivery of the Merger Agreement by [ICE] constitutes notice of the ICE Holding Companies' intention in writing to acquire the Proposed Share Ownership and Proposed Voting Rights, and the Board hereby consents to a period of notice shorter than forty-five (45) days before the proposed ownership of such shares or the proposed exercise of such voting rights.
In addition to the Resolutions, to waive the current Ownership and Voting Limitations, pursuant to Article FIFTH, Paragraph (b)(iii)(B) of the CHX Holdings Certificate, the Exchange proposes the Bylaw Waiver Amendment to the CHX Holdings Bylaws. The Bylaw Waiver Amendment would be added to the CHX Holdings Bylaws for the sole purpose of allowing the Transaction to Close. It would provide as follows:
(a) For the sole purpose of permitting the merger contemplated by an Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated April 4, 2018, among [CHX Holdings], Kondor Merger Sub, Inc. and Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., under which [CHX Holdings] will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of the NYSE Group, Inc. and will become an indirect subsidiary of NYSE Holdings LLC, Intercontinental Exchange Holdings, Inc. and Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (for the purposes of this Article XII, Section 12.1, NYSE Group, Inc., NYSE Holdings LLC, Intercontinental Exchange Holdings, Inc. and Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. are collectively referred to herein as the “ICE Holding Companies” and individually referred to herein as the “ICE Holding Company”), the Board of Directors hereby waives pursuant to Article FIFTH, paragraph (b)(iii)(B) of the certificate of incorporation of [CHX Holdings] dated July 27, 2006, as amended (“2006 Certificate”), with respect to each of the ICE Holding Companies: (i) the restrictions on ownership of capital stock of [CHX Holdings] described in Article FIFTH, paragraph (b)(ii)(A) of the 2006 Certificate (“Ownership Limits”) to permit the ICE Holding Company to possess ownership in [CHX Holdings] in excess of the Ownership Limits (“Proposed Share Ownership”); and (ii) the restrictions on voting rights with respect to the capital stock of [CHX Holdings] as described in Article FIFTH, paragraph (b)(ii)(C) of the 2006 Certificate (“Voting Limits”) to permit the ICE Holding Company to possess voting rights in excess of the Voting Limits (“Proposed Voting Rights”).
(b) In so waiving the applicable Ownership Limits and Voting Limits, the Board of Directors has determined, with respect to each of the ICE Holding Companies, that: (i) The acquisition of the Proposed Share Ownership by the ICE Holding Company will not impair the ability of the CHX to carry out its functions and responsibilities as an “exchange” under the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, is otherwise in the best interests of [CHX Holdings], its stockholders and the CHX, and will not impair the ability of the Commission to enforce the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder; (ii) the acquisition or exercise of the Proposed Voting Rights by the ICE Holding Company will not impair the ability of the CHX to carry out its functions and responsibilities as an “exchange” under the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, that it is otherwise in the best interests of [CHX Holdings], its stockholders and the CHX, and that it will not impair the ability of the Commission to enforce the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder; and (iii) neither the ICE Holding Company, nor any of its Related Persons, is subject to “statutory disqualification” within the meaning of Section 3(a)(39) of the Exchange Act.
In connection with the Transaction, the Exchange proposes to retain most of the current provisions of the CHX Certificate and CHX Bylaws, except that the Exchange proposes to make certain revisions to the provisions regarding the composition, election and terms of the Exchange Board.
Following consummation of the Transaction, the Exchange would become part of a corporate family including five separate registered national securities exchanges. The Exchange believes that it is important for each of such exchanges to have a consistent approach to corporate governance in certain matters. Therefore, to simplify complexity and create greater consistency with the organizational documents and governance practices of the NYSE Exchanges, the Exchange proposes to revise the provisions of the CHX Certificate and CHX Bylaws as described below.
The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the CHX Certificate and CHX Bylaws are consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act.
The Exchange proposes to restructure and amend Article II, Sections 2 and 3 of the Bylaws governing the powers, composition, nomination and election of its Board to more closely align the Bylaws with the relevant provisions of the other NYSE Exchanges.
To effect these changes, the Exchange proposes the following:
The Exchange proposes to add “Amended and Restated” to the start of the title of the CHX Bylaws.
The first sentence of Article I, Section 2 makes a reference to the “Board of Governors.” The Exchange believes that the reference should be to the Board of Directors, as it has not had a Board of Governors since its demutualization.
The Exchange proposes to make the number, composition, term of office and qualifications of the Board consistent with the make-up of the boards of directors of the NYSE Exchanges.
Article II, Section 2(b) of the current CHX Bylaws sets forth the composition of the Board, providing that the Board shall consist of the Chief Executive Officer of the Exchange, “Public Directors” and “Participant Directors.” Section 2(b) specifies that the Public Directors make up one-half of the directors, and that a director who is neither the Chief Executive Officer nor a Public Director shall be a Participant Director. Section 2(b) defines “Public Director” as a director who (i) is not a Participant, or an officer, managing member, partner or employee of an entity that is a Participant, (ii) is not an employee of the Exchange or any of its affiliates, (iii) is not broker or dealer or an officer or employee of a broker or dealer, or (iv) does not have any other material business relationship with (x) CHX Holdings, the Exchange or any of their affiliates or (y) any broker or dealer. It defines “Participant Director” as a director who is a Participant or an officer, managing member or partner of an entity that is a Participant, and that the “Participant” shall mean any individual, corporation, partnership or other entity that holds a trading permit issued by Exchange. Finally, current Section 2(b) provides that a director shall qualify as a Public Director or Participant Director only so long as such director meets the requirements for that position.
The Exchange proposes to replace Section 2(a) and (b) with a new proposed Section 2(a). Such subsection would provide that the number of directors would be determined from time to time by the stockholders, provided that the Board must meet the composition requirements in the Bylaws. This change would be consistent with the NYSE National Bylaws and NYSE Arca Bylaws, which provide that the shareholders and holding member, respectively, set the number of directors, as well as the NYSE and NYSE American Operating Agreements, which both provide that the number of directors is determined by the member, in each case provided that the boards of directors meet the composition requirements.
Specifically, new subsection (a) would require that the Board be made up as follows:
• At least 50 percent of the directors would be persons from the public and would not be, or be affiliated with, a broker-dealer in securities or employed by, or involved in any material business relationship with, the Exchange or its affiliates (“Public Directors”); and
• at least 20 percent of the directors would consist of individuals nominated by the trading permit holders who are permitted to trade on the Exchange's facilities for the trading of equities that are securities as covered by the Exchange Act (collectively, “Permit Holders”) (such directors, the “STP Participant Directors”).
Although the NYSE National and NYSE Arca Bylaws use the term “Non-Affiliated Directors” rather than “STP Participant Directors,” the Exchange proposes to use “STP Participant Directors” consistent with its current terminology.
In addition, proposed subsection (a) would provide that, for purposes of calculation of the minimum number of STP Participant Directors, if 20 percent of the Directors is not a whole number, such number of Directors to be nominated and selected by the Permit Holders would be rounded up to the next whole number. Proposed subsection (a), like current subsection (a), would provide that the term of office of a director shall not be affected by any decrease in the authorized number of directors.
Proposed new subsection (b) would provide that nominees for a director position shall provide the Secretary of the Exchange such information as is reasonably necessary to serve as the basis for a determination of the nominee's qualifications as a director, and that the Secretary shall make such determination concerning the nominee's qualifications.
The Exchange proposes to replace Section 2(c) with new subsections (c) through (e). New subsection (c) would provide that at the each annual meeting of the stockholders, except as otherwise provided by the Bylaws, the stockholders would elect directors to serve until the next annual meeting or until their successors are elected and qualified. Proposed new subsection (d) would provide that the Exchange Board shall appoint the Chairman of the Board by majority vote. Proposed new subsection (e) would provide that each director shall hold office for a term that expires at the annual meeting of the stockholders next following his or her election, provided that if he or she is not re-elected and his or her successor is not elected and qualified at the meeting and there remains a vacancy on the Board, he or she shall continue to serve until his or her successor is elected and qualified or until his or her earlier death, resignation or removal. Finally, current Section 2(d), which provides
The proposed change from a three-class board with staggered terms to a board with one class of directors elected annually would make the organization of the Board consistent with those of all of the NYSE Exchanges.
Article II, Section 3 sets forth the process for the nomination and election of the Board. The Exchange proposes to revise Article II, Section 3(a), replace Section 3(b)-(e) with a new Section 3(b), replace Section 3(f)-(g) with a new Section 3(c), and add a new Section 3(d).
The proposed new Article II, Section 3 would be substantially similar to provisions in the NYSE Arca Bylaws and NYSE National Bylaws,
The Exchange proposes to rename the NGC the “Nominating Committee” consistent with NYSE National and NYSE Arca, which both have nominating committees that fill substantially the same role that the Exchange proposes the CHX Nominating Committee play.
The Exchange proposes that, like the NYSE National nominating committee, the Nominating Committee be composed solely of STP Participant Directors and/or Permit Holder representatives. Consistent with the NYSE National definition of “ETP Holder Representative,” “Permit Holder representative” would mean an officer, director, employee or agent of a Permit Holder.
Proposed Article II, Section 3(b) would replace current Article II, Section 3(b)-(e).
Further, proposed Section 3(b) would provide that, after the name of proposed nominee(s) is published, Permit Holders in good standing may submit a petition to the Exchange in writing to nominate additional eligible candidate(s) to fill STP Participant Director position(s) during the next term. If a written petition of at least 10 percent of Permit Holders in good standing were submitted to the Nominating Committee within two weeks after the Announcement Date, such person(s) would also be nominated by the Nominating Committee, provided, however, that no Permit Holder, either alone or together with other Permit Holders that are deemed its affiliates, may account for more than 50 percent of the signatories to the petition endorsing a particular petition nominee for the STP Participant Director position(s) on the Board. Proposed Section 3(b) would stipulate that each petition for a petition candidate must include a completed questionnaire used to gather information concerning director candidates, with the form of the questionnaire provided by the Exchange upon the request of any Permit Holder. Finally, proposed Section 3(b) would provide that, notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the Nominating Committee shall determine whether any petition candidate is eligible to serve on the Board (including whether such person is free of any Statutory Disqualification), and such determination shall be final and conclusive.
Proposed Article II, Section 3(c) would replace current Article II, Section 3(f)-(g).
Finally, proposed Section 3(d) would provide that the Board of Directors shall appoint the Nominating Committee, consistent with the final sentence of current Section 3(a), which provides that the Board of Directors shall appoint the NGC.
In accordance with its proposed change from a three-class board with staggered terms to a board with one class of directors elected annually as set forth in proposed Article II, Section 2, the Exchange proposes to amend the penultimate sentence in Article II, Section 6. Currently, such sentence provides as follows.
A director chosen to fill a vacancy or newly-created directorship by the directors then in office shall hold office until the end of the next annual meeting of stockholders, at which time a director shall be elected by vote of the stockholders to fill any remaining portion of the term of the class to which such director belongs.
As there would no longer be different classes of director, the Exchange proposes to delete “, at which time a director shall be elected by vote of the stockholders to fill any remaining portion of the term of the class to which such director belongs.”
In accordance with its proposed change to the NGC, the Exchange proposes to delete “and Governance” from “Nominating and Governance Committee” in the following provisions: Article II, Section 5(b) (Vice Chairman); Article IV, Section 1 (Number of Committees) and Section 2 (Appointment of Committees); and Article V, Section 5 (Officers Appointed by Chief Executive Officer).
In accordance with its proposed use of “STP Participant Director” and amendments to the composition of the Board set forth in proposed Article II, Section 2(a), the Exchange proposes to add “STP” before “Participant Director” in Article II, Section 6 and Section 7 (Participation in Meeting, Action or Proceeding).
In accordance with proposed Article II, Section 3(d), the Exchange proposes to update the cross reference in the first sentence of Article IV, Section 2 from Article II, Section 3(a) to Article II, Section 3(d).
The Exchange proposes to restructure and amend Article FIFTH of the CHX Certificate governing the composition, nomination and election of its Board to more closely align with the proposed amended CHX Bylaws and the relevant provisions of the other NYSE Exchanges.
To effect these changes, the Exchange proposes the following amendments.
The Exchange proposes to add “Amended and Restated” to the start of the title of the CHX Certificate and to add a signature line at the end of the CHX Certificate.
The Exchange proposes to adopt an introductory sentence providing that the proposed CHX Certificate has been duly adopted in accordance with Sections 242 and 245 of the General Corporation Law of Delaware.
The Exchange proposes to add a second sentence to current Article FIRST stating that the original Certificate of Incorporation of CHX was filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware on March 15, 1972, and the name under which the Corporation filed the Original Certificate of Incorporation was Midwest Stock Exchange Incorporated.
The Exchange proposes to amend the address and name of its registered office and registered agent in the State of Delaware set forth in Article SECOND, to update them to the information for the registered office and registered agent that it will use following the Transaction.
Current Article FIFTH sets forth provisions regarding the number, composition, term, election, and removal of Directors, as well as vacancies on the Board. The Exchange proposes to revise Article FIFTH, Paragraphs (b)-(g) to conform to proposed Article II, Section 2 of the CHX Bylaws.
The Exchange proposes to replace Article FIFTH, Paragraphs (b) and (c) with a provision substantially similar to proposed Article II, Section 2(a) of the CHX Bylaws.
The Exchange proposes to add a new Article FIFTH, Paragraph (c) with the same provision as proposed Article II, Section 2(b) of the CHX Bylaws, with the exception that the cross reference to Section 2(a) of the CHX Bylaws would be to Article FIFTH, Paragraph (b).
The Exchange proposes to replace the current Article FIFTH, Paragraph (d) with the same provision as proposed Article II, Section 2(e) of the CHX Bylaws, which sets forth the proposed terms of the directors.
The Exchange proposes to replace the current Article FIFTH, Paragraph (e) with the same provision as proposed Article II, Section 2(c) of the CHX Bylaws, which states that at each annual meeting of stockholders, except as otherwise provided by the CHX Bylaws the stockholders shall elect directors to serve until the next annual meeting or until their successors are elected and qualified.
Following the consummation of the Transaction, CHX Holdings will be one of a series of holding companies of the Exchange. The Exchange believes that it is important for each of its five holding companies to have a consistent approach to certain matters.
Upon Closing, CHX Holdings' governing documents would be as set forth in the CHX Holdings Bylaws and CHX Holdings Certificate (together, the “CHX Holdings Governing Documents”). To limit complexity and create greater consistency with the organizational documents of the ICE Holding Companies, as proposed, the CHX Holdings Governing Documents would be substantially similar to the NYSE Group Bylaws and NYSE Group Certificate, with the limited differences described below. To effect the changes, upon Closing:
• The proposed changes to the CHX Holdings Certificate set forth in Exhibit 5C, which would replace the current text of the CHX Holdings Certificate in its entirety except for the title, would become operative.
• The proposed changes to the CHX Holdings Bylaws set forth in Exhibit 5D, which would replace the current text of the CHX Holdings Bylaws in its entirety except for the title, would become operative, with the exception of the Bylaw Waiver Amendment, which would have become operative immediately before the Closing.
Article I, Section 1.1 of the CHX Holdings Bylaws would reference CHX Holdings instead of NYSE Group, and the title would be “Second Amended and Restated Bylaws of CHX Holdings, Inc.”
Because CHX Holdings, unlike NYSE Group, does not have preferred stock, the text “Subject to the rights of the holders of any series of Preferred Stock to elect additional directors under specified circumstances,” would not be included in Article III, Section 3.1 (General Powers) of the proposed CHX Holdings Bylaws. For the same reason, the text “Subject to the rights of the holders of any series of Preferred Stock with respect to such series of Preferred Stock,” would not be included in Article III, Section 3.5 (Removal) of the proposed CHX Holdings Bylaws.
Some of the differences between the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate and the NYSE Group Certificate would reflect the differences in their name, ownership, and history.
• The introductory paragraph, recitals, Article XIV and the signature line of the NYSE Group Certificate would not be included.
• Article I (Name of Corporation) of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would reference CHX Holdings instead of NYSE Group, and the title would be “Second Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of CHX Holdings, Inc.”
• Article IV, Section 4 (Transfers of Stock of the Corporation) of the NYSE
CHX Holdings has 100 shares of common stock, and, unlike NYSE Group, does not have preferred stock or options. Accordingly, the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would have differences from the NYSE Group Certificate reflecting the entities' distinct stock structures.
• Proposed Article IV, Section 1 (Authorized Stock) would be as follows: “The total number of shares of all classes of stock which the Corporation shall have authority to issue is one hundred (100), all of which shall be shares of Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share.”
• Article IV, Section 2 (Preferred Stock) and Section 3 (Options, Warrants and Other Rights) as well as Article V, Section 7 (Directors Selected by Holders of Preferred Stock) of the NYSE Group Certificate would not be adopted.
• In proposed Article V, Section 3 (Number of Directors), the phrase “Subject to the rights of the holders of any series of Preferred Stock to elect additional directors under specified circumstances,” would not be adopted from Article V, Section 3 of the NYSE Group Certificate. Similarly, in proposed Article V, Section 5 (Removal of Directors) the phrase “Subject to the rights of the holders of any series of Preferred Stock with respect to such series of Preferred Stock, and” would not be adopted from Article V, Section 5 of the NYSE Group Certificate.
• In proposed Article VII, Section 2 (Quorum), the second sentence would not be adopted from Article VII, Section 2 of the NYSE Group Certificate.
As set forth below, the proposed CHX Holdings Governing Documents include various provisions addressing CHX Holdings' role as the holding company of a national securities exchange registered under Section 6 of the Exchange Act (each such national securities exchange so controlled, a “U.S. Exchange”),
Article IV, Section 2(a) of the Proposed Certificate would ensure that any change in ownership of CHX Holdings would be subject to Commission approval, by providing that CHX Holdings may not transfer or assign any stock unless such transfer or assignment is filed with and approved by the Commission under Section 19 of the Exchange Act.
Article IV, Section 2(b) of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would set forth voting and ownership concentration limitations. The proposed provision would be substantially similar to the limitations in the governing documents of all the ICE Holding Companies, which apply so long as the relevant ICE Holding Company owns any U.S. Exchange.
• No person (alone or together with its related persons) shall be entitled to vote or cause the voting of stock of CHX Holdings representing in the aggregate more than 10 percent of the then outstanding votes entitled to be cast on such matter, and no person (either alone or together with its related persons) may acquire the ability to vote more than 10 percent of the aggregate number of votes being cast on any matter by virtue of agreements entered into with other persons not to vote shares of CHX Holding's outstanding capital stock. CHX Holding will disregard any such votes purported to be cast in excess of these limitations.
• In addition, no person (alone or together with its related persons) may at any time beneficially own stock of CHX Holdings representing in the aggregate more than 20% of the then outstanding votes entitled to be cast on any matter.
• In the event that a person (alone or together with its related persons) beneficially owns stock of CHX Holdings in excess of the 20 percent ownership threshold, such person and its related persons will be obligated to sell, and CHX Holdings will be obligated to purchase (to the extent that funds are legally available) the number of shares necessary to reduce the ownership level of such person and its related persons to below the permitted threshold, after taking into account that such repurchased shares will become treasury shares and will no longer be deemed to be outstanding.
Proposed Article IV, Section 2(b)(4) would provide that the CHX Holdings Board shall have the right to require any person (and its related persons) to provide information regarding its share ownership to CHX Holdings if the Board reasonably believes such person (and its related persons) is subject to the voting and ownership limits or owns beneficially an aggregate of 5 percent or more of the then outstanding shares of CHX Holdings.
The provisions regarding voting and ownership limits may be waived if the CHX Holdings Board resolves to expressly permit it, and if such resolutions have been filed with, and
• The proposed act will not impair the ability of CHX Holdings or any U.S. Exchange to discharge their respective responsibilities under the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder and is otherwise in the best interests of CHX Holdings, its stockholders and each U.S. Exchange.
• The proposed act would not impair the Commission's ability to enforce the Exchange Act.
• The person seeking to exceed the voting thresholds or ownership limit is not subject to any statutory disqualification as defined in Section 3(a)(39) of the Exchange Act
Article V, Section 7 of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would set forth considerations each director must take into account in discharging his or her responsibilities, including consideration of the effect that CHX Holding's actions would have on the ability of the U.S. Exchanges to carry out their responsibilities under the Exchange Act. In addition, Article V, Section 7 would require that each director, officer or employee of CHX Holdings comply with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder, cooperate with the Commission and cooperate with each U.S. Exchange pursuant to and to the extent of its regulatory authority.
Article VI of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would provide that no person that is subject to any Statutory Disqualification may be a director or officer of CHX Holdings.
Article IX of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would provide that CHX Holdings, its directors and officers, and its employees whose principal place of business and residence is outside of the United States, submit to the jurisdiction of the federal courts and the Commission, and waive claims that it or they are not personally subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission and of inconvenient forum, improper venue, or lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Article X of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would address the books and records of the U.S. Exchanges. Specifically, it would provide that confidential information pertaining to the self-regulatory function of any U.S. Exchange contained in books and records in the possession of the Corporation shall only be made available to officers, directors, employees and agents of CHX Holdings (“CHX Holdings Personnel”) with a reasonable need to know the contents thereof; shall be retained in confidence by CHX Holdings and CHX Holdings Personnel; and shall not be used for any commercial purposes.
Article X of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would provide that nothing in the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate shall be interpreted to limit or impede the rights of the Commission or any U.S. Exchange to access and examine such U.S. Exchange's confidential information pursuant to the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder, or to limit or impede the ability of any CHX Holdings Personnel to disclose such confidential information to the Commission or a U.S. Exchange. In addition, proposed Article X would provide that CHX Holdings' books and records shall be subject at all times to inspection and copying by the Commission and the relevant U.S. Exchange.
Finally, proposed Article X would provide that, for so long as CHX Holdings directly or indirectly controls any U.S. Exchange, the books, records, premises, officers, directors and employees of CHX Holdings shall be deemed to be of such Exchange for purposes of and subject to oversight pursuant to the Exchange Act.
Article XI, Section 1 of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would provide that CHX Holdings shall comply with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder and shall cooperate with the Commission and the U.S. Exchanges pursuant to and to the extent of their respective regulatory authority, and shall take reasonable steps necessary to cause its agents to cooperate, with the Commission and, where applicable, a U.S. Exchange pursuant to their regulatory authority.
Article XI, Section 2 of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would provide that CHX Holdings shall take reasonable steps necessary to cause its officers, directors and employees, prior to accepting their position, to consent to the applicability of proposed Section 7 of Article V, Article IX, Article X and Section 3 of Article XI of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate with respect to their activities related to any U.S. Exchange.
Article XI, Section 3 of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate would provide that CHX Holdings, its directors, officers and employees shall give due regard to the preservation of the independence of the self-regulatory function of each U.S. Exchange and to obligations to investors and the general public and shall not take any actions that would interfere with the effectuation of any decisions by the board of directors or managers of a U.S. Exchange relating to their regulatory functions (including disciplinary matters) or that would interfere with the ability of the U.S. Exchange to carry out its responsibilities under the Exchange Act.
Article XII of the proposed CHX Holdings Certificate and Article VII, Section 7.9(b) of the proposed CHX Holdings Bylaws would provide that, for so long as CHX Holdings controls any U.S. Exchange, before any amendment or repeal of any provision of the relevant CHX Holdings Governing Document shall be effective, it shall either (a) be filed with or filed with and approved by the Commission under Section 19 of the Exchange Act and the rules promulgated thereunder
Following the Transaction, the Exchange and CHX Holdings will both have direct and indirect parent companies. The Exchange accordingly proposes to adopt the NYSE Group Certificate, NYSE Group Bylaws, NYSE Holdings Operating Agreement, ICE Holdings Certificate, ICE Holdings Bylaws, ICE Certificate and ICE Bylaws as rules of the Exchange. Such documents include provisions addressing each ICE Holding Company's role as a holding company of U.S. Exchanges, including as described below.
NYSE Group, NYSE Holdings, and ICE Holdings are subject to provisions requiring that any transfer of assignment of the respective entity's stock would be subject to Commission approval.
Each of the ICE Holding Companies is subject to voting and ownership concentration limitations, which apply so long as the relevant ICE Holding Company owns any U.S. Exchange.
Each of the ICE Holding Companies is subject to provisions setting forth considerations directors must take into account in discharging their responsibilities, including consideration of the effect that the relevant ICE Holding Company's actions would have on the ability of the U.S. Exchanges to carry out their responsibilities under the Exchange Act.
No person that is subject to any Statutory Disqualification may be a director or officer of the NYSE Group or NYSE Holdings.
Each of the ICE Holding Companies is subject to provisions submitting to the jurisdiction of the federal courts and the Commission.
Each of the ICE Holding Companies is subject to provisions regarding the books and records of the U.S. Exchanges. Such provisions provide, among other things, that:
• Confidential information that relates to the self-regulatory function of any U.S. Exchange shall only be made available to officers, directors, employees and agents with a reasonable need to know the contents thereof.
• Nothing in the relevant document shall be interpreted to limit or impede the rights of the Commission or any U.S. Exchange to access and examine such U.S. Exchange's confidential information pursuant to relevant law.
• The U.S. Exchanges' books and records shall be subject at all times to inspection and copying by the Commission and the relevant U.S. Exchange.
• The books, records, premises, officers, directors and employees of the U.S. Exchanges shall be deemed to be of such U.S. Exchange for purposes of and subject to oversight pursuant to the Exchange Act.
Each of the ICE Holding Companies is required to comply with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. The relevant provisions require, among other things, the relevant ICE Holding Company to:
• Cooperate with the Commission and the U.S. Exchanges pursuant to and to the extent of their respective regulatory authority.
• Take reasonable steps to cause officers, directors and employees to consent to the applicability of provisions regarding their activities related to any U.S. Exchange.
• Along with its directors, officers and employees, give due regard to the preservation of the independence of the self-regulatory function of each U.S. Exchange and to obligations to investors and the general public and to not take any actions that would interfere with the effectuation of any decisions by the board of directors or managers of a U.S. Exchange relating to their regulatory functions or that would interfere with the ability of the U.S. Exchange to carry out its responsibilities under the Exchange Act.
Finally, each of the ICE Holding Companies is subject to limitations on their ability to amend or repeal their governing documents without the proposed amendment or repeal being filed with, or filed with and approved by, the Commission.
The Exchange proposes that, in connection with the Transaction, the Commission approve the ICE Independence Policy, which is to be amended concurrently with the Transaction to reflect ownership of the Exchange. The ICE Independence Policy would be amended to provide similar protections to the Exchange as are currently provided to the NYSE Exchanges by the policy.
More specifically, the ICE Director Independence Policy would be amended to add the Exchange to the section describing “Independence Qualifications.” In particular, the
The NYSE no longer has allied members.
In addition, references to NYSE MKT LLC under “Independence Qualifications” and “Member Organizations” would be updated to reflect its name change to NYSE American LLC.
Conforming changes would also be made to delete and replace connectors.
The Exchange proposes to amend CHX Article 2, Rules 2, 3, 4, and 11, consistent with the proposed changes to the provisions in the CHX Bylaws and CHX Certificate regarding the composition of the Exchange Board. In addition, the Exchange proposes to amend CHX Article 19, Rule 2(b), to address the role of ArcaSec as an inbound router. The Exchange also proposes to add new Rule 28 to CHX Article 22, which rule would set forth requirements for the Exchange relating to trading securities issued by ICE or its affiliates.
As proposed, Section 2(a) of the CHX Bylaws would provide that the number of directors would be determined from time to time by the stockholders, provided that the Board must meet the composition requirements in the Bylaws.
The proposed changes are as follows.
• The first sentence of CHX Article 2, Rule 2, provides that the Executive Committee “shall have not less than five members, all of whom shall be directors, plus the Chairman of the Board.” The Exchange proposes to replace “five” with “two,” so the Executive Committee would have no less than three members, one of whom shall be the Chairman of the Board.
• The first sentence of CHX Article 2, Rule 3, provides that the Finance Committee “shall have not less than five members, in addition to the Chairman of the Board, all of whom shall be Directors.” The Exchange proposes to replace “five” with “two,” so the Finance Committee would have no less than three members, one of whom shall be the Chairman of the Board.
• The first sentence of CHX Article 2, Rule 4, provides that the Regulatory Oversight Committee “shall consist of at least five Public Directors. The Exchange proposes to replace “five” with “three.” As a result, the Regulatory Oversight Committee would have no less than three members, all of whom would be Public Directors.
CHX Article 2, Rule 11 sets forth the responsibilities of the Nominating and Governance Committee. Consistent with the changes to the name and role of the committee set forth in proposed Article II, Section 3(a) of the CHX Bylaws, in the first sentence of Rule 11 the Exchange proposes to delete “and Governance” from the first sentence, add “and responsibilities” prior to “set out,” and to delete the second sentence of the Rule. The amended text would read as follows:
There shall be a Nominating Committee which shall have the composition and responsibilities set out in the Exchange's Bylaws.
The proposed name and responsibilities for the committee would be consistent with NYSE National and NYSE Arca, which both have nominating committees that fill substantially the same role that the Exchange proposes the CHX Nominating Committee play.
ArcaSec is a Participant of the Exchange, and may route approved types of orders from any of the NYSE Exchanges to the Exchange. Once the Transaction closes, ArcaSec will also be an affiliate of the Exchange. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to add a new subparagraph (b) to CHX Article 19, Rule 2 to provide that ArcaSec may act as an inbound router. Proposed CHX Article 19, Rule 2(b) would be substantially similar to rules of the NYSE Exchanges.
More specifically, proposed Rule 2(b)(1) would provide that, for so long as the Exchange is affiliated with the NYSE Exchanges and ArcaSec, in its capacity as a facility of the NYSE Exchanges, is utilized for the routing of any approved types of orders from those
• The Exchange shall maintain an agreement pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Exchange Act (“Rule 17d-2 Plan”) with a non-affiliated SRO to relieve the Exchange of regulatory responsibilities for ArcaSec with respect to rules that are common rules between the Exchange and the non-affiliated SRO.
• The Exchange shall maintain a regulatory services agreement (“RSA”) with a non-affiliated SRO to perform regulatory responsibilities for ArcaSec for unique Exchange rules.
• The RSA shall require the Exchange and the non-affiliated SRO to monitor ArcaSec for compliance with the Exchange's trading rules, and collect and maintain, in an easily accessible manner, all alerts, complaints, investigations and enforcement actions (collectively “Exceptions”) in which ArcaSec (in routing orders to the Exchange) is identified as a participant that has potentially violated applicable Exchange or Commission rules. The RSA shall require that the non-affiliated SRO provide a report, at least quarterly, to the Chief Regulatory Officer of the Exchange quantifying all Exceptions.
• The Exchange, on behalf of the holding company owning both the Exchange and ArcaSec, shall establish and maintain procedures and internal controls reasonably designed to prevent ArcaSec from receiving any benefit, taking any action or engaging in any activity based on non-public information regarding planned changes to Exchange systems, obtained as a result of its affiliation with the Exchange, until such information is available generally to similarly situated Participants of the Exchange in connection with the provision of inbound order routing to the Exchange.
• The Exchange may furnish to ArcaSec the same information on the same terms that the Exchange makes available in the normal course of business to any other Participant.
Proposed Rule 2(b)(2) would state that, provided the above conditions are complied with, ArcaSec may provide inbound routing services to the Exchange from the NYSE Exchanges.
The Exchange proposes to add a new Rule 28 to CHX Article 22 to set forth requirements for the Exchange relating to trading securities issued by ICE or its affiliates. Proposed Rule 28 is based in part on NYSE Rule 497 and NYSE American Rule 497—Equities. After the Closing, the Exchange would be a wholly-owned subsidiary of ICE, as would be stated in proposed Rule 28(a)(3). Proposed Rule 28.1(a)(1) [sic] would define the term “ICE Affiliate” to mean ICE and any entity that directly or indirectly, through one or more intermediaries, controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with ICE, where “control” means that one entity possesses, directly or indirectly, voting control of the other entity either through ownership of capital stock or other equity securities or through majority representation on the board of directors or other management body of such entity. This proposed rule is based on NYSE Rule 497(a)(1) and NYSE American Rule 497(a)(1)—Equities without any substantive differences. Proposed Rule 28.1(a)(2) [sic] would define the term “Affiliate Security” to mean any security issued by an ICE Affiliate or any Exchange-listed option on any such security. This proposed rule is based on NYSE American Rule 497(a)(2)—Equities without any differences.
Because the Exchange is not a primary listing venue, the Exchange proposes a difference from both NYSE Rule 497 and NYSE American Rule 497—Equities to provide in proposed Rule 28.1(b) [sic] that “No Affiliate Security will be listed on the Exchange.” Because no Affiliate Security will be listed on the Exchange, the Exchange does not propose rule text based on NYSE Rule 497(c)(1)(a), (c)(2), or (c)(3). Proposed Rule 28.1(c) [sic] would instead provide that throughout the trading of the Affiliate Security on the Exchange, the Exchange would prepare a quarterly report on the Affiliate Security for the Exchange's Regulatory Oversight Committee that describes Exchange regulatory staff's monitoring of the trading of the Affiliate Security including summaries of all related surveillance alerts, complaints, regulatory referrals, adjusted trades, investigations, examinations, formal and informal disciplinary actions, exception reports and trading data used to ensure the Affiliate Security's compliance with the Exchange's trading rules.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Exchange Act,
In addition, the proposed CHX Holdings Governing Documents and governing documents of the ICE Holding Companies contain provisions intended to protect and maintain the independence and integrity of the self-regulatory functions of the Exchange upon Closing. Such provisions include submitting such entities to the jurisdiction of the federal courts and the Commission; obligating them to comply with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder; requiring directors to take into consideration the effect that the relevant entity's actions would have on the ability of the U.S. Exchanges, including the Exchange, to carry out their responsibilities under the Exchange Act; setting ownership and voting concentration limits on prospective owners; and imposing requirements regarding confidential information and books and records. In particular, the Exchange believes that the ownership and voting concentration limits preclude undue influence over or interference with the Exchange's self-regulatory functions and fulfillment of its regulatory duties under the Exchange
The Exchange believes that the proposed change would enable the Exchange to be so organized as to have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Exchange Act and to comply, and to enforce compliance by its exchange members and persons associated with its exchange members, with the provisions of the Exchange Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange, because the proposed Bylaw Waiver Amendment, amendments to the governing documents of the Exchange and CHX Holdings, adoption of governing documents of the ICE Holding Companies as rules of the Exchange, and rule changes would effectuate the changes to the Exchange rules necessary to close the Transaction and provide for an efficient transition into a new organizational structure as soon as practicable after approval by the Commission of the proposed rule change. At the same time, because the Exchange is not proposing any significant changes to its existing operational and trading structure in connection with the change in ownership, the Exchange will operate in essentially the same manner upon Closing as it operates today. The Exchange believes this will provide consistency, predictability and clarity in its rules during the post-Closing transition, which would be beneficial to both investors and the public interest.
The Exchange believes that amending the CHX Bylaw and CHX Certificate provisions and CHX Article 2 governing the powers, composition and election of its Board would enable the Exchange to be so organized as to have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Exchange Act and to comply, and to enforce compliance by its exchange members and persons associated with its exchange members, with the provisions of the Exchange Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange, because the proposed changes would establish an organizational structure designed to ensure that the Exchange will be able to continue to discharge its obligations as an SRO pursuant to the Exchange Act. For the same reason, the Exchange believes that, by putting mechanisms in place such as the Rule 17d-2 Plan, RSA, Exception reporting requirements, procedures and internal controls, the proposed changes to CHX Article 19, Rule 2(b) would protect the independence of the Exchange's self-regulatory function and are designed to prevent ArcaSec from acting on non-public information regarding planned changes to Exchange systems obtained as a result of its affiliation with the Exchange, thereby enabling the Exchange to be so organized as to have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Exchange Act and to comply, and to enforce compliance by its exchange members and persons associated with its exchange members, with the provisions of the Exchange Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange. Similarly, the Exchange believes that the reporting requirements set forth in proposed CHX Article 22, Rule 28 would enable the Exchange to be so organized as to have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Exchange Act and to comply, and to enforce compliance by its exchange members and persons associated with its exchange members, with the provisions of the Exchange Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange, by ensuring ROC oversight of the trading of Affiliate Securities, through quarterly reports regarding the Exchange regulatory staff's monitoring of such trading. At the same time, all other provisions regarding the SRO function of the Exchange would remain substantively unchanged and in full force and effect prior to, during and after the Closing. The Exchange believes that would provide continuity in Exchange governance so as to facilitate the transition to the post-Closing governance structure, protecting and maintaining the independence of the self-regulatory functions of the Exchange and allowing it to continue to discharge its obligations as an SRO throughout any post-Closing transition.
The Exchange believes that the proposed amendments to Article II, Sections 2 and 3 of the CHX Bylaws and Article FIFTH of the CHX Certificate would be consistent with Section 6(b)(3) of the Exchange Act,
The Exchange also believes that the filing furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act,
In addition, by clearly stating that the stockholders determine the size of the Board; presenting the Board composition requirements, including how the minimum number of Non-Affiliated directors shall be calculated; and setting forth how the Board shall be elected, the proposed amendments to Article II, Sections 2 and 3 of the CHX Bylaws, Article FIFTH of the CHX Certificate and CHX Article 2 would contribute to the orderly operation of the Exchange by adding clarity, transparency and consistency to its rules.
The Exchange further believes that making non-substantive technical and conforming changes throughout the CHX Certificate, CHX Bylaws and CHX Article 2 to reflect the Exchange's proposed new ownership, including updating corporate names, defined terms, and cross references and removing an obsolete reference to the Board of Governors, removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market by removing confusion that may result from having these references in the governing documents following the Transaction. The Exchange further believes that the proposal removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market by ensuring that persons subject to the Exchange's jurisdiction, regulators, and the investing public can more easily navigate and understand its governing documents. The Exchange further believes that the proposed changes would not be inconsistent with the public interest and the protection of investors because investors will not be harmed and in fact would benefit from increased transparency, thereby reducing potential confusion. Removing such obsolete references will also further the goal of transparency and add clarity to the Exchange's rules.
The Exchange believes that adopting proposed CHX Holdings Governing Documents that are based on the documents of the ICE Holding Companies generally, and NYSE Group specifically, and adopting governing documents of the ICE Holding Companies as rules of the Exchange, would facilitate a governance and regulatory structure that is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, 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, because it would create more equivalent governing standards among all of the Exchange's direct and indirect parents, creating consistency, predictability and clarity in its rules, which is beneficial to both investors and the public interest. The proposed amendments will make the framework of the Exchange's direct parent substantially similar to the relevant framework and processes of the ICE Holding Companies, which have been well-established as fair and designed to protect investors and the public interest.
In addition, the Exchange believes that amending the ICE Independence Policy to reflect the change in ownership of the Exchange and to remove outdated or obsolete references will remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest by removing confusion that may results from having these references in the ICE Independence Policy, allowing persons subject to the Exchange's jurisdiction, regulators, and investors to more easily navigate and understand the policy.
The Exchange believes that adopting proposed CHX Holdings Governing Documents that are based on the documents of the ICE Holding Companies generally, and NYSE Group specifically, will promote consistency among the various governance documents of the Exchange's holding companies and facilitate the ability of the Commission to provide oversight regarding the upstream governance of the Exchange. The proposed CHX Holdings Governing Documents contain provisions intended to protect and maintain the independence and integrity of the self-regulatory functions of the Exchange upon Closing. As such, these provisions operate to assure that the Exchange's rules meet the statutory requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest.
Moreover, the Exchange believes that the proposed affiliation between the Exchange and Archipelago will not result in unfair discrimination between Participants as Archipelago will not operate as a “facility” of the Exchange, as defined under Section 3(a)(2) of the Exchange Act,
Finally, the Exchange believes that, the proposed changes to CHX Article 19, Rule 2(b) and new CHX Article 22, Rule 28 would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest, as after the Closing CHX Article 19, Rule 2(b)[it] will allow the routing of orders from affiliated exchanges to the Exchange. At the same time, by putting mechanisms in place such as the Rule 17d-2 Plan, RSA, Exception reporting requirements, procedures and internal controls, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes would protect the independence of the Exchange's self-regulatory function and are designed to prevent ArcaSec from acting on non-public information regarding planned changes to Exchange systems obtained as a result of its affiliation with the Exchange. Similarly, the Exchange believes that proposed CHX Article 22, Rule 28 would remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the public interest, because the reporting requirements set forth in Rule 28 would ensure ROC oversight of the trading of Affiliate Securities through quarterly reports regarding the Exchange regulatory staff's monitoring of such trading. The Exchange believes that the differences between proposed CHX Article 22, Rule 28 and the rules of NYSE and NYSE American would promote just and equitable principles of trade because the Exchange will not be a primary listing venue and has
For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the Exchange Act.
In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Exchange Act,
Indeed, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will enhance competition among trading venues, as the Exchange believes that the Transaction will result in various synergies and efficiencies. For example, the Transaction will allow CHX to utilize Pillar, which is an integrated trading technology platform designed to use a single specification for connecting to the equities and options markets operated by the NYSE Exchanges.
The Exchange notes that the Exchange and the NYSE Exchanges generally operate with different business models and target different customer bases, limiting any concern that the Transaction could burden competition. Therefore, the Exchange expects that the Transaction will benefit investors, issuers, shareholders and the market as a whole. The Exchange will continue to conduct regulated activities (including operating and regulating its market and members) of the type it currently conducts, but will be able to do so in a more efficient manner to the benefit of its members. These efficiencies will pass through to the benefit of investors and issuers, promoting further efficiencies, competition and capital formation, placing no burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the Exchange Act.
Furthermore, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change presents no novel issues, as all of the proposed rule text is derived from existing rules of the NYSE Exchanges or, in the case of the Bylaw Waiver Amendment, the Exchange. The Exchange's conclusion that the proposed rule change would not result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act is consistent with the Commission's prior conclusions about similar combinations involving multiple exchanges in a single corporate family.
The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
A. By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),
The Exchange is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed rule change to amend the Fee Schedule t [sic] on the BOX Market LLC (“BOX”) options facility. The text of the proposed rule change is available from the principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the Exchange's internet website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend Section VI.B.3 (Drop Copy) of the BOX Fee Schedule. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to add language that states that drop copy fees will be capped at $2,000 per month. The Exchange notes that BOX will continue to assess Drop Copy Port Fees of $500 per port per month for each month a Participant is credentialed to use a Drop Copy Port, subject to the $2,000 cap.
The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act, in general, and Section 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5)of the Act,
The Exchange believes that the proposed drop copy fee cap is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. The Exchange recently established Port Fees for Participants.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Instead the proposed change will allow the Exchange to not impose significant costs for Participants with legacy drop copy connections. Further, the Exchange does not believe that capping the Drop Copy Port Fees will impose an undue burden on intra-market competition because all Participants are eligible for the fee cap.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Exchange Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend the rule change if it appears to the Commission that the action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or would otherwise further the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”).
Notice.
Notice of an application for an order under section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) for an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d), and 22(e) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act, and under section 12(d)(1)(J) for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act. The requested order would permit (a) actively-managed series of certain open-end management investment companies (“Funds”) to issue shares redeemable in large aggregations only (“Creation Units”); (b) secondary market transactions in Fund shares to occur at negotiated market prices rather than at net asset value (“NAV”); (c) certain Funds to pay redemption proceeds, under certain circumstances, more than seven days after the tender of shares for redemption; (d) certain affiliated persons of a Fund to deposit securities into, and receive securities from, the Fund in connection with the purchase and redemption of Creation Units; (e) certain registered management investment companies and unit investment trusts outside of the same group of investment companies as the Funds (“Funds of Funds”) to acquire shares of the Funds; and (f) certain Funds (“Feeder Funds”) to create and redeem Creation Units in-kind in a master-feeder structure.
DMS ETF Trust I and DMS ETF Trust II (each a “Trust” and together, the “Trusts”), each a Delaware statutory trust that will be registered under the Act as an open-end management investment company with multiple series, and DMS ETF Solutions, LLC (“Initial Adviser”), a Delaware limited liability company that will be registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.
The application was filed on March 12, 2018.
An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on June 18, 2018, and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or for lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090; Applicants: Michael W. Mundt, Esq. and Matthew R. DiClemente, Esq., Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP, 1250 Connecticut Avenue NW, Ste. 500, Washington, DC 20036; William H. Woolverton, DMS ETF Solutions, LLC, 130 West 42nd Street, Ste. 1050, New York, NY 10036.
Matthew B. Archer-Beck, Senior Counsel, at (202) 551-5044, or Kaitlin C. Bottock, Branch Chief, at (202) 551-6825 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).
The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained via the Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at
1. Applicants request an order that would allow Funds to operate as actively-managed exchange traded funds (“ETFs”).
2. Each Fund will consist of a portfolio of securities and other assets and investment positions (“Portfolio Instruments”). Each Fund will disclose on its website the identities and quantities of the Portfolio Instruments that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of NAV at the end of the day.
3. Shares will be purchased and redeemed in Creation Units and generally on an in-kind basis. Except where the purchase or redemption will include cash under the limited circumstances specified in the application, purchasers will be required to purchase Creation Units by depositing specified instruments (“Deposit Instruments”), and shareholders redeeming their shares will receive specified instruments (“Redemption Instruments”). The Deposit Instruments and the Redemption Instruments will each correspond pro rata to the positions in the Fund's portfolio (including cash positions) except as specified in the application.
4. Because shares will not be individually redeemable, applicants request an exemption from section 5(a)(1) and section 2(a)(32) of the Act that would permit the Funds to register as open-end management investment companies and issue shares that are redeemable in Creation Units only.
5. Applicants also request an exemption from section 22(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act as secondary market trading in shares will take place at negotiated prices, not at a current offering price described in a Fund's prospectus, and not at a price based on NAV. Applicants state that (a) secondary market trading in shares does not involve a Fund as a party and will not result in dilution of an investment in shares, and (b) to the extent different prices exist during a given trading day, or from day to day, such variances occur as a result of third-party market forces, such as supply and demand. Therefore, applicants assert that secondary market transactions in shares will not lead to discrimination or preferential treatment among purchasers. Finally, applicants represent that share market prices will be disciplined by arbitrage opportunities, which should prevent shares from trading at a material discount or premium from NAV.
6. With respect to Funds that hold non-U.S. Portfolio Instruments and that effect creations and redemptions of Creation Units in kind, applicants request relief from the requirement imposed by section 22(e) in order to allow such Funds to pay redemption proceeds within fifteen calendar days following the tender of Creation Units for redemption. Applicants assert that the requested relief would not be inconsistent with the spirit and intent of section 22(e) to prevent unreasonable, undisclosed or unforeseen delays in the actual payment of redemption proceeds.
7. Applicants request an exemption to permit Funds of Funds to acquire Fund shares beyond the limits of section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act; and the Funds, and any principal underwriter for the Funds, and/or any broker or dealer registered under the Exchange Act, to sell shares to Funds of Funds beyond the limits of section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act. The application's terms and conditions are designed to, among other things, help prevent any potential (i) undue influence over a Fund through control or voting power, or in connection with certain services, transactions, and underwritings, (ii) excessive layering of fees, and (iii) overly complex fund structures, which are the concerns underlying the limits in sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act.
8. Applicants request an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act to permit a person who is an affiliated person, as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act (“Affiliated Person”), or an affiliated person of an Affiliated Person (“Second-Tier Affiliate”), of the Funds, solely by virtue of certain ownership interests, to effectuate purchases and redemptions in-kind. The deposit procedures for in-kind purchases of Creation Units and the redemption procedures for in-kind redemptions of Creation Units will be the same for all purchases and redemptions and Deposit Instruments and Redemption Instruments will be valued in the same manner as those Portfolio Instruments currently held by the Funds. Applicants also seek relief from the prohibitions on affiliated transactions in section 17(a) to permit a Fund to sell its shares to and redeem its shares from a Fund of Funds, and to engage in the accompanying in-kind transactions with the Fund of Funds.
9. Applicants also request relief to permit a Feeder Fund to acquire shares of another registered investment company managed by the Adviser having substantially the same investment objectives as the Feeder Fund (“Master Fund”) beyond the limitations in section 12(d)(1)(A) and permit the Master Fund, and any principal underwriter for the Master Fund, to sell shares of the Master Fund to the Feeder Fund beyond the limitations in section 12(d)(1)(B).
10. Section 6(c) of the Act permits the Commission to exempt any persons or transactions from any provision of the Act if such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security, or transaction, or any class or classes of persons, securities, or transactions, from any provision of section 12(d)(1) if the exemption is consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors. Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to grant an order permitting a transaction otherwise prohibited by section 17(a) if it finds that (a) the terms of the proposed transaction are fair and reasonable and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned; (b) the proposed transaction is consistent with the policies of each registered investment company involved; and (c) the proposed transaction is consistent with the general purposes of the Act.
For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, under delegated authority.
On November 13, 2017, The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) advance notice SR-OCC-2017-811 (“Advance Notice”) pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (“Payment Supervision Act”)
Since the proposal contained in the Advance Notice was also filed as a proposed rule change, all public comments received on the proposal are considered regardless of whether the comments are submitted on the Proposed Rule Change or the Advance Notice.
OCC's margin methodology, the System for Theoretical Analysis and Numerical Simulations (“STANS”), calculates clearing member margin requirements.
The expected shortfall component is established as the estimated average of potential losses higher than the 99% value at risk threshold.
A “risk factor” within OCC's margin system may be defined as a product or attribute whose historical data are used to estimate and simulate the risk for an associated product.
Under OCC's current margin methodology, OCC obtains monthly price data for most of its equity-based products from a third-party vendor.
In addition, OCC imposes a floor on volatility estimates for its equity-based products using a 500-day look back period.
In risk management, it is a common practice to establish a floor for volatility at a certain level in order to protect against procyclicality in the model.
OCC's current methodology for estimating covariance and correlations between risk factors relies on the same monthly data described above, resulting in a similar lag time between updates.
Finally, under OCC's existing margin methodology, theoretical price scenarios for “defaulting securities”
In addition to the proposed methodology changes described herein, OCC also would make some clarifying and clean-up changes, unrelated to the proposed changes described herein, to update its margin methodology to reflect existing practices for the daily calibration of seasonal and non-seasonal energy models and the removal of methodology language for certain products that are no longer cleared by OCC.
The Advance Notice proposes changes to OCC's margin methodology, STANS. More specifically, OCC proposes to: (1) Obtain daily price data for equity products (including daily corporate action-adjusted returns of equities where price and thus returns of securities are adjusted for any dividends issued, stock splits, etc.) for use in the daily estimation of econometric model parameters; (2) enhance its econometric model for updating statistical parameters (
As a general matter, OCC believes that introducing daily updates for price data would result in more accurate margin requirements that are based off of the most recent market data. OCC also believes that the other model enhancements would, among other things, improve OCC's approach to estimating covariance and correlations between risk factors in an effort to achieve more accurate and timely correlation estimations.
OCC proposes to introduce daily updates for price data for equity products, including daily corporate action-adjusted returns of equities, Exchange Traded Funds (“ETFs”), Exchange Traded Notes (“ETNs”) and certain indexes.
In addition to introducing daily updates for price and corporate action-adjusted returns data, OCC is proposing enhancements to its econometric model for calculating statistical parameters for all qualifying risk factors that reflect the most recent data obtained (
Under the proposal, the statistical parameters for the model would be updated on a daily basis using the new daily price data obtained by OCC from a reliable third-party (as described above).
The current approach for forecasting the conditional variance for a given risk factor does not consider the asymmetric volatility phenomenon observed in financial markets (also called the “leverage effect”) where volatility is more accurate and timely and reactive to market downturns.
OCC also proposes to change the statistical distribution used to model the returns of equity prices. OCC's current methodology uses a fat tailed distribution
OCC further proposes to introduce a second-day forecast for volatility into the econometric model to estimate the two-day scenario distributions for risk factors.
In addition, OCC proposes to modify its floor for volatility estimates. OCC currently imposes a floor on volatility estimates for its equity-based products using a 500-day look back period.
As described above, OCC's current methodology for estimating covariance and correlations between risk factors relies on the same monthly price data feeding the econometric model, resulting in a similar lag time between updates.
In order to address these limitations, OCC proposes to enhance its methodology for calculating correlation estimates by moving to a daily process for updating correlations (with a minimum of one week's lag) to help ensure clearing member account margins are more current and thus more accurate.
Under the proposal, OCC would enhance its methodology for estimating the defaulting variance in its model.
Under the proposal, only optionable equity securities, which are typically more liquid, would be considered while estimating the default variance.
Under the proposal, OCC would use a shorter time series to enable calibration of the model for all securities.
Under the proposal, returns scenarios for defaulting securities
Although the Act does not specify a standard of review for an advance notice, the stated purpose of the Act is instructive: To mitigate systemic risk in the financial system and promote financial stability by, among other things, promoting uniform risk management standards for SIFMUs and strengthening the liquidity of SIFMUs.
Section 805(a)(2) of the Act
• To promote robust risk management;
• to promote safety and soundness;
• to reduce systemic risks; and
• to support the stability of the broader financial system.
Section 805(c) provides, in addition, that the Commission's risk-management standards may address such areas as risk-management and default policies and procedures, among others areas.
The Commission has adopted risk-management standards under Section 805(a)(2) of the Act and the Exchange Act (the “Clearing Agency Rules”).
The Commission believes that the proposal contained in OCC's Advance Notice is consistent with the stated objectives and principles of Section 805(b) of the Act. Specifically, as discussed below, the Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with promoting robust risk management in the area of credit risk and promoting safety and soundness, which in turn, would help reduce systemic risks and support the stability of the broader financial system.
The Commission believes that the proposed changes promote robust risk management by enhancing OCC's margin methodology for the reasons set forth below.
First, as noted above, the STANS methodology is used to measure the exposure of portfolios of options and futures cleared by OCC and cash instruments in margin collateral on behalf of its clearing members, which allows OCC to calculate its clearing members' margin requirements. Currently, STANS makes these calculation based on monthly price data obtained from a third-party vendor. To make the calculations more accurate and representative of recent market data, OCC proposes to amend its margin methodology to require the use of daily updates for equity price data instead of monthly updates, thereby reducing OCC's reliance on scale-factors.
Second, the proposal discussed above to amend OCC's margin methodology to require the use of daily updates for price data would allow for updates to the margin model's statistical parameters on a daily, instead of monthly, basis.
Third, as described earlier, OCC proposes to enhance its approach to model correlation estimates by moving to a daily process for updating correlations and by de-volatizing the return series to estimate the correlations. This change is intended to lead to normalized returns across a variety of asset classes and make the correlation estimator less sensitive to sudden market jumps and therefore more stable. Accordingly, the Commission believes that updating the correlations daily and de-volatizing the return series to reduce the estimator's sensitivity to market jumps promotes more accurate and robust models within the STANS methodology.
Finally, to enhance its methodology for estimating the defaulting securities in its model, OCC proposes to: (i) Modify the method for estimating the default variance to include only optionable equity securities; (ii) use a shorter time series of six months instead of two years to enable calibration of the model for all securities within OCC systems; and (iii) simulate return scenarios for defaulting securities assuming a default correlation with the driver RUT. Accordingly, the Commission believes these changes will mitigate the effect that extremely illiquid securities with discontinuous data can have on OCC's default estimates, while further decreasing the degree to which the default variance is subject to sudden jumps across volatile months.
Taken together, the Commission believes that these proposals would improve the accuracy of OCC's credit exposure calculations and, consequently, OCC's calculations of its clearing members' margin requirements. Therefore, the Commission believes the changes proposed in the Advance Notice would promote robust risk management, consistent with Section 805(b) of the Act.
The Commission further believes that the proposed changes would help promote safety and soundness, reduce systemic risk and support the stability of the broader financial system. As described above, the proposed changes are designed to better limit OCC's credit exposure to the clearing members in the event of a clearing member default. More specifically, the daily updates of the pricing data, the enhancements to the econometric model, and the enhancements to the correlation estimates promote more accurate and stable model measurements that have less volatility. Moreover, the enhancements to the defaulting securities methodology will decrease the manner in which the default estimates are affected by illiquid securities and reducing the amount to which the default variance is subject to sudden jumps.
By better limiting credit exposure to its clearing members, OCC's proposed changes are designed to help ensure that, in the event of a clearing member default, OCC's operations would not be disrupted and that its SIFMU functions would therefore be able to continue in a safe and sound manner. Furthermore, the ongoing safe and sound functioning of OCC via an enhanced ability to determine margin requirements should help ensure that non-defaulting clearing members would not be exposed to losses that they cannot anticipate or control. As such, the Commission finds that the proposed changes are consistent with the promotion of safety and soundness, which in turn, would reduce systemic risks and support the stability of the broader financial system, consistent with Section 805(b) of the Act.
Therefore, the Commission believes the changes proposed in the Advance Notice are consistent with Section 805(b) of the Act.
The Commission believes that the changes proposed in the Advance
As described above, the proposal contained in the Advance Notice would make several amendments to OCC's margin methodology designed to improve how it: (i) Accounts for asymmetry in conditional variance;
The Commission believes the modifications proposed are designed to improve the manner in which STANS would calculate daily margin requirements for OCC's clearing members. Consequently, the Commission believes that the proposal is designed both (i) to consider, and produce margin levels commensurate with, the risks and particular attributes of each relevant product, portfolio, and market
By the Commission.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange filed a proposal to amend a representation made in a rule change previously approved by the Commission relating to the listing and trading of the iShares Gold Strategy ETF (the “Fund”), a series of the iShares U.S. ETF Trust (the “Trust”).
The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
The shares of the Fund (the “Shares”) were approved for listing and trading on the Exchange under Exchange Rule 14.11(i), which governs the listing and trading of Managed Fund Shares.
The Exchange proposes to amend the Approval Order in order to make clear that the representation that limits Fund holdings in the Subsidiary
The Exchange is proposing to replace that sentence with the following:
The Exchange believes that this proposed change is a non-controversial change because it is only to clarify that the 25% Limitation is measured on a quarterly basis in compliance with Sub-Chapter M of the Internal Revenue Code. This proposed change regarding the 25% Limitation is the only change covered by this proposal, and all other representations in the Approval Order, including both initial listing requirements and Continued Listing Representations,
The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
As described above, all of the Continued Listing Representations which formed the basis for the Commission in approving the Approval Order remain true and will continue to constitute listing requirements for the Fund with the exception of the single representation that the Exchange is proposing to make clearer. This proposed change will only make clear the basis for and timing of the calculation of the 25% Limitation and is not proposing to make any substantive changes to the types or amounts of any particular instrument that the Fund can hold. As such, the Exchange believes that the proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, 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.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that making clear the timing of the calculation of and the basis for the 25% Limitation will have no impact on competition.
The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on the proposed rule change.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees related to Complex Orders traded on the Exchange.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Schedule of Fees related to Complex Orders traded on the Exchange, including: (1) Priority Customer
Currently, the Exchange has a fee structure in place for Complex Orders that provides rebates to Priority Customer Complex Orders in order to encourage Members to bring that order flow to the Exchange. Specifically, Priority Customer Complex Orders are provided rebates in Select Symbols
The rebate for the highest tier volume achieved is applied retroactively to all eligible Priority Customer Complex volume once the threshold has been reached.
Members will not receive rebates for net zero complex orders. For purposes of determining which complex orders qualify as “net zero” the Exchange will count all complex orders that leg in to the regular order book and are executed at a net price per contract that is within a range of $0.01 credit and $0.01 debit.
The Exchange now proposes to modify this rebate structure such that Priority Customer Complex Order rebates will be paid a rebate based on a percentage of industry volume rather than straight volume thresholds. In addition, the Exchange proposes to move away from a tier calculation based solely on Priority Customer Complex ADV to one that includes Complex Orders entered for other market participant types, and orders entered by affiliates of the Member. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to adopt Priority Customer Complex Tiers that are based on Total Affiliated Member Complex Order Volume (Excluding Crossing Orders and Responses to Crossing Orders) Calculated as a Percentage of Customer Total Consolidated Volume. All Complex Order volume executed on the Exchange, including volume executed by Affiliated Members, will be included in the volume calculation, except for volume executed as Crossing Orders and Responses to Crossing Orders. An “Affiliated Member” is a Member that shares at least 75% common ownership with a particular Member as reflected on the Member's Form BD, Schedule A. Furthermore, “Customer Total Consolidated Volume” means the total national volume cleared at The Options Clearing Corporation in the Customer range in equity and ETF options in that month.
As proposed, there will be nine Priority Customer Complex Order Tiers based on the percentage of industry volume calculation: 0.000%-0.200% (Tier 1); above 0.200%-0.400% (Tier 2); above 0.400%-0.600% (Tier 3), above 0.600%-0.800% (Tier 4), above 0.800%-1.000% (Tier 5), above 1.000%-1.600% (Tier 6), above 1.600%-2.000% (Tier 7), above 2.000%-3.500% (Tier 8), above 3.500% (Tier 9). Furthermore, the associated rebates will be modified such that in Select Symbols the proposed rebate will be $0.25 per contract for Tier 1, $0.30 per contract for Tier 2, $0.35 per contract for Tier 3, $0.40 per contract for Tier 4, $0.45 per contract for Tier 5, $0.46 per contract for Tier 6, $0.48 per contract for Tier 7, and $0.50 per contract for Tiers 8 and 9. Furthermore, in Non-Select Symbols the proposed rebate will be $0.40 per contract for Tier 1, $0.55 per contract for Tier 2, $0.70 per contract for Tier 3, $0.75 per contract for Tier 4, $0.80 per contract for Tiers 5-7, and $0.85 per contract for Tiers 8 and 9.
Market Maker Complex Orders in Select Symbols are charged a maker fee of $0.47 per contract when trading against Priority Customer Complex Orders, and a $0.50 per contract taker fee regardless of the counterparty. Currently, each of these fees is reduced to $0.44 per contract for Market Makers with total affiliated Priority Customer Complex ADV of 150,000 or more contracts.
In addition, Market Makers that qualify for the Market Maker Plus program are currently charged a fee $0.10 per contract instead of the applicable Market Maker Plus rebate when trading against Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book. Regardless of the counterparty, a $0.10 per contract maker fee also applies to Market Makers that do not qualify for Market Maker Plus and Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Makers. With the proposed Priority Customer Complex Order Tiers described above, which in some cases may result in higher rebates being provided to Priority Customer Complex Orders, including Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book, the Exchange proposes to increase the fee for trading against Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to increase this fee to $0.15 per contract and apply it to all Market Maker Orders and Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Maker Orders. Furthermore, there is currently no fee charged or rebate provided to Market Maker Orders submitted by Market Makers that qualify for Market Maker Plus when trading against non-Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book. As proposed, this treatment will be afforded to all Market Maker Orders when trading against non-Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book. The fees for Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Makers for trading against non-Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book will remain unchanged.
Currently, the Exchange assesses a $0.03 per contract surcharge to non-Priority Customer Complex Orders in Non-Select Symbols that take liquidity from the Complex Order Book, excluding Complex Orders executed in the Facilitation Mechanism, Solicited Order Mechanism, Price Improvement Mechanism (“PIM”) and “exposure” auctions pursuant to Rule 722(b)(3)(iii). The Exchange proposes to increase this taker surcharge to $0.05 per contract.
With the changes described above, which add additional content to the Schedule of Fees, the Exchange proposes to make certain non-substantive formatting changes that are designed to make the flow of the Schedule of Fees easier for Members to understand. None of these changes affect the fees charged or rebates provided to members. With the proposed changes, the Exchange will
The first table,
Finally, the footnote referenced in the column on Facilitation and Solicitation Break-up Rebates for Select Symbols contains an outdated reference to the PIM. Specifically, the footnote provides that rebates are provided per contract per leg for contracts that are submitted to PIM, Facilitation and Solicitation Mechanisms . . .” As indicated in the header to the column, these break-up rebates apply to the Facilitation and Solicitation Mechanisms only. The language related to the PIM was included in the Schedule of Fees when the Exchange offered a break-up rebate for the PIM. When the Exchange eliminated PIM break-up rebates, the Exchange deleted the column that included those rebates but did not remove the related reference in this footnote.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the Priority Customer Complex Order Tiers are reasonable and equitable as these changes are designed to incentivize Members to trade Complex Orders, and, in particular Priority Customer Complex Orders, on the Exchange. The Exchange is proposing to base Priority Customer Complex Order Tiers on a percentage of industry volume in recognition of the fact that the volume executed by a Member may rise or fall with industry volume. A percentage of industry volume calculation allows the Exchange's tiers to be calibrated to current market volumes rather than requiring the same amount of volume regardless of market conditions. While the amount of volume required by the proposed tiers may change in any given month due to increases or decreases in industry volume, the Exchange believes that the proposed tier requirements are set at a level that roughly corresponds to the current ADV requirements for Priority Customer Complex Tiers. The Exchange is also proposing to include additional types of Complex Order volume in the tier calculation. Although the current tier structure counts solely Priority Customer Complex ADV, the proposed structure would allow Members to qualify for higher tier based on all Complex Order volume except for Crossing Orders and Responses to Crossing Orders. The Exchange believes that increasing the volume counted for purposes of calculating tiers will encourage Members to bring different types of Complex Order volume to the Exchange (
In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as these changes are designed to bring more order flow, and in particular, Priority Customer Complex Orders, to the Exchange. The Exchange does not believe that it is unfairly discriminatory provide rebates only to Priority Customer Complex Orders as this is the order flow that the Exchange is seeking to incentivize. A Priority Customer is by definition not a broker or dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). This limitation does not apply to participants whose behavior is substantially similar to that of market professionals, including Professional Customers, who will generally submit a higher number of orders than Priority Customers. The Exchange currently has Priority Customer Complex Order Tiers in place to incentivize that order flow, and is simply modifying those tiers in a way that the Exchange believes will increase participation in Complex Orders. The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the Priority Customer Complex Tiers will benefit all market participants that trade on the Exchange by increasing their opportunities to trade.
Furthermore, the Exchange believes that its proposed definitions of “Affiliated Member” and “Customer Total Consolidated Volume” are reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory as these definitions clarify terms that the Exchange is using to describe its Priority Customer Complex Tiers. The proposed definitions are consistent with definitions adopted for these concepts on the Exchange's affiliated exchanges, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (“MRX”) and Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (“GEMX”) respectively.
The Exchange believes the proposed changes to the Market Maker Complex Order fees in Select Symbols are reasonable and equitable as the
Furthermore, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes to Market Maker Complex Order fees are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory the changes apply equally to all Market Maker Complex Orders based on achieving the required Priority Customer Complex Tier. As is the case today, the Exchange will continue to charge lower fees to Market Makers that execute, through their affiliates, a significant volume of Priority Customer Complex Orders, as this will incentivize members to bring order flow to the Exchange, creating additional liquidity in Complex Orders to the benefit of all Members. The Exchange does not believe that it is unfairly discriminatory only to provide these lower fees to Market Maker Orders as Market Makers are subject to additional requirements and obligations (such as quoting requirements) that other market participants are not.
The Exchange also believes that that it is reasonable and equitable to increase the maker fee charged to Market Makers and Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Makers that provide liquidity to Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book. Today, Market Makers that do not qualify for Market Maker Plus and Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Makers pay a small fee for providing liquidity in Select Symbols. In addition, Market Makers that qualify for Market Maker Plus and would typically be eligible for a maker rebate are instead charged a maker fee when trading against Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book. At the same time, the Exchange pays high rebates to Priority Customer Complex Orders, including when those Complex Orders leg into the regular order book. In some cases these rebates may be increased with the proposed changes described above to the Priority Customer Complex Order Tiers. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to increase the fees charged for all Market Maker and Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Maker Orders that provide liquidity to Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular market as this will help offset potentially significant rebates paid on the other side of these trades. In this regard, the proposed fee increase would decrease but not completely eliminate the negative economics associated with these trades as the Exchange pays out significantly more in rebate opportunity for Priority Customer Complex Orders than it receives from other side of the trade when those orders leg into the regular order book. Furthermore, the Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to reduce fees for all Market Maker Orders trading against non-Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book. Currently, this benefit is provided only to Market Makers that achieve Market Maker Plus status. The Exchange believes, however, that it is appropriate to extend this benefit to all Market Maker Orders as an additional incentive for Market Makers that have an obligation to maintain quotes and provide liquidity in the regular market rather than only those Market Makers that meet the heightened requirements of Market Maker Plus. Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Makers who have no obligations to provide liquidity will not be eligible for this incentive.
Furthermore, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes to these fees for Market Maker and Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Maker Orders are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as they are designed to reduce the negative economics associated with Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book. The proposed fees will apply equally to all Market Makers and Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Makers. The Exchange pays significant rebates to that Priority Customer Complex Orders, including when those orders leg into the regular order book where they may trade with Market Makers and Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Makers providing liquidity in the regular market. The Exchange does not believe it is unfairly discriminatory to charge increased maker fees only to Market Maker and Non-Nasdaq ISE Market Maker Orders as these market participants are typically the ones providing liquidity and trading with Priority Customer Complex Orders that leg into the regular order book.
The Exchange believes that the proposed increase the taker surcharge for non-Priority Customer Complex Orders in Non-Select Symbols that take liquidity from the complex order book is reasonable and equitable. The proposed fees are modestly increased and the Exchange believes that such fees will remain attractive to market participants, who will continue to be charged lower fees for adding liquidity to the complex order book than for removing liquidity, and who may be granted additional opportunities to trade by virtue of the incentives being granted to attract Priority Customer Complex Orders to the Exchange. Furthermore, the Exchange believes that the proposed change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as it applies to all non-Priority Customer Complex Orders that take liquidity in Non-Select Symbols.
The Exchange believes that the proposed formatting changes to the tables are reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory. As explained in the purpose section of this filing, these changes are entirely cosmetic and merely move around columns in various tables so that these are grouped in a manner that the Exchange believes will be easier for Members to follow. The Exchange hopes that these changes will increase the readability of the Schedule of Fees by grouping fees and rebates for Complex Orders under three headings—
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that the proposed changes will enhance both intermarket and intramarket competition by amending various fees and rebates related to the trading of Complex Orders on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed fees and rebates remain competitive with those on other options markets, and will continue to attract order flow to the Exchange, thereby encouraging additional volume and liquidity to the benefit of all market participants. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily direct their order flow to competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees and rebates to remain competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that the proposed fee changes reflect this competitive environment.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Small Business Administration.
30-day notice.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) is publishing this notice to comply with requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which requires agencies to submit proposed reporting and recordkeeping requirements to OMB for review and approval, and to publish a notice in the
Submit comments on or before June 28, 2018.
Comments should refer to the information collection by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to:
Curtis Rich, Agency Clearance Officer, (202) 205-7030,
Small Business Administration (SBA) Surety Bond Guarantee Program was created to encourage surety companies to provide bonding for small contractors. The information collected on this form from small businesses and surety companies will be used to evaluate the eligibility of applicants for contracts up to $250,000.
Comments may be submitted on (a) whether the collection of information is necessary for the agency to properly perform its functions; (b) whether the burden estimates are accurate; (c) whether there are ways to minimize the burden, including through the use of automated techniques or other forms of information technology; and (d) whether there are ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information.
State Justice Institute.
Notice of meeting.
The SJI Board of Directors will be meeting on Monday, June 11, 2018 at 1:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Minnesota Judicial Center, 25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., Room 230, St. Paul, Minnesota. The purpose of this meeting is to consider grant applications for the 3rd quarter of FY 2018, and other business. All portions of this meeting are open to the public.
Minnesota Judicial Center, 25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., Room 230, St. Paul, MN.
Jonathan Mattiello, Executive Director, State Justice Institute, 11951 Freedom Drive, Suite 1020, Reston, VA 20190, 571-313-8843,
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
Twenty Ninth RTCA SC-222 AMS(R)S Systems Plenary.
The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a meeting of Twenty Ninth RTCA SC-222 AMS(R)S Systems Plenary.
The meeting will be held June 26-27, 2018 8:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.
The meeting will be virtual:
Karan Hofmann at
Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is hereby given for a meeting of the Twenty Ninth RTCA SC-222 AMS(R)S Systems Plenary. The agenda will include the following:
Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice and request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew a previously approved information collection. The information collected is required from aircraft operators who wish to obtain a unique authorization code for transmitting information to the International Registry in Dublin, Ireland. An estimated 30 minutes is required to complete the only form in the collection, AC Form 8050-135. The
Written comments should be submitted by June 28, 2018.
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
Barbara Hall at (940) 594-5913, or by email at:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice and request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew a previously approved information collection. The Information to be collected is necessary to insure the safety of the flying public. Documentation of maintenance repair actions record who, what, when, where and how of the task performed. All maintenance actions as well as documentation are required by regulation. This insures proper certification of personnel; proper tooling is utilized and accurate measures to insure safety. The FAA reviewed 54,237 form 337s from October 2016 to September 2017. Each 337 takes approximately .5 hours. The
Written comments should be submitted by June 28, 2018.
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
Barbara Hall at (940) 594-5913, or by email at:
DOT/FAA.
Notice and request for comments.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Department of Transportation (DOT) provides notice that it will submit an information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for emergency approval of a proposed information collection. Upon receiving the requested six-month emergency approval by OMB, FAA will follow the normal PRA procedures to obtain extended approval for this proposed information collection. This collection involves data reporting by ten Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration Pilot Program (IPP) participants regarding their program participation. Because ten participants were selected for the program due to the significant number of applicants, DOT and FAA request emergency approval for this Information related to this ICR, including applicable supporting documentation may be obtained by contacting the UAS Integration Office at 844-359-6982 or
Written comments should be submitted by June 5, 2018. Comments should be submitted as soon as possible upon publication of this notice in the
Through the IPP, the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) plan to develop and innovate the safe operation of UAS technologies and their use in agriculture, commerce, emergency management and other sectors. The IPP promotes continued technological innovation and growth to ensure U.S. global leadership in the emerging UAS industry and to safely integrate UAS into the National Airspace System (NAS).
In order to accomplish these goals through the IPP, the collection of data from the ten participants is critical. Requiring the collection of information from program participants allows the agency to inform its future plans, programs, and regulations. DOT and FAA have requested emergency approval from the Office of Management and Budget in order to begin immediate data collection.
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1:48.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice and request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew a previously approved information collection. The information will determine if applicant proposals for conducting commercial space launches can be accomplished according to regulations issued by the Office of the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation. The
Written comments should be submitted by June 28, 2018.
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
Barbara Hall at (940) 594-5913, or by email at:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice and request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew a previously approved information collection. The information to be collected includes data required for performing launch site location analysis. The launch site license is valid for a period of 5 years. Respondents are licensees authorized to operate sites. The
Written comments should be submitted by June 28, 2018.
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
Barbara Hall at (940) 594-5913, or by email at:
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
Notice of Limitation on Claims for Judicial Review of Actions by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
The FHWA, on behalf of Caltrans, is issuing this notice to announce actions taken by Caltrans, that are final. The actions relate to a proposed highway project, U.S. Route 101 (US-101) between postmile 32.8 to postmile 33.8, immediately west of Liberty Canyon Road, in the City of Agoura Hills, in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. Those actions grant licenses, permits, and approvals for the project.
A claim seeking judicial review of the Federal agency actions on the highway project will be barred unless the claim is filed on or before October 26, 2018
For Caltrans: Susan Tse-Koo, Branch Chief, Division of Environmental Planning, California Department of Transportation. Address: 100 S. Main Street MS16A, Los Angeles CA 90012, Regular Office Hours M-F 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Phone number (213) 897-1821, Email
Effective July 1, 2007, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) assigned, and the California Department of
This notice applies to all Federal agency decisions as of the issuance date of this notice and all laws under which such actions were taken, including but not limited to:
1. Memorandum of Understanding with FHWA for NEPA assignment dated, December 23, 2016.
2. Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient, Transportation Equity Act, A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU Section 6002).
3. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1967.
4. MAP-21 (Pub. L. 112-141).
5. Section 4(f), Department of Transportation Act of 1966.
23 U.S.C. 139(
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of applications for exemption; request for comments.
FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 30 individuals for an exemption from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable these hard of hearing and deaf individuals to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
Comments must be received on or before June 28, 2018.
You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-FMCSA-2017-0057 using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for a five-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 five-year period. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The 30 individuals listed in this notice have requested an exemption from the hearing requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11). 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.
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person first perceives a
This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).
On February 1, 2013, FMCSA announced in a Notice of Final Disposition titled, Qualification of Drivers; Application for Exemptions; National Association of the Deaf, (78 FR 7479), its decision to grant requests from 30 individuals for exemptions from the Agency's physical qualification standard concerning hearing for interstate CMV drivers. Since the February 1, 2013 notice, the Agency has published additional notices granting requests from hard of hearing and deaf individuals for exemptions from the Agency's physical qualification standard concerning hearing for interstate CMV drivers.
Mr. Bridgeford, age 47, holds an operator's license in Nevada.
Mr. Brown, age 22, holds an operator's license in Mississippi.
Mr. Carter, age 38, holds an operator's license in Ohio.
Mr. Cates, age 66, holds a class A CDL in New Mexico.
Mr. Chin, age 50, holds a class A CDL in Washington.
Mr. Craig, age 80, holds a class A CDL in Illinois.
Mr. DeLeon, age 28, holds an operator's license from Texas.
Mr. DiPasquale, age 24, holds an operator's license in Maryland.
Mr. Duhon, age 41, holds an operator's license in Alabama.
Mr. Eash, age 39, holds an operator's license in Ohio.
Mr. Fisher, age 31, holds an operator's license in Pennsylvania.
Ms. Foss, age 50, holds a class A CDL in California.
Mr. Ledford, age 29, holds an operator's license in Tennessee.
Mr. McFadden, age 39, holds an operator's license in Texas.
Mr. Mendoza, age 46, holds an operator's license in California.
Mr. Mitchell, age 68, holds an operator's license in Texas.
Mr. Mostepan, age 37, holds an operator's license in California.
Mr. Moorehead, age 58, holds a class A CDL in Ohio.
Mr. Nagel, age 60, holds an operator's license in Minnesota.
Mr. Paul, age 41, holds an operator's license in Washington.
Mr. Perez, age 32, holds an operator's license in Wisconsin.
Ms. Ralston, age 41, holds an operator's license in Georgia.
Mr. Reed, age 53, holds a class A CDL in Texas.
Mr. Sanders, age 47, holds an operator's license in Virginia.
Mr. Schibilla, age 62, holds a class A CDL in Illinois
Ms. Singleton, age 54, holds an operator's license in Texas.
Mr. Slate, age 35, holds an operator's license in New Mexico.
Ms. Smith, age 56, holds a class A CDL in Georgia.
Mr. Tayman, age 41, holds an operator's license in Maine.
Mr. Winemiller, age 44, holds a class A CDL in Illinois.
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 dates section of the notice.
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
We will consider all comments and materials received during the comment period. FMCSA may issue a final determination any time after the close of the comment period.
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this preamble, go to
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 64 individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in one eye.
Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in the discussions below.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, 202-366-4001,
You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at:
On February 15, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to renew exemptions for 64 individuals from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (83 FR 6925). The public comment period ended on March 19, 2018, and no comments were received.
As stated in the previous notice, FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically qualified to driver a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red, green, and amber.
FMCSA received no comments in this preceding.
Based upon its evaluation of the 64 renewal exemption applications and comments received, FMCSA confirms its' decision to exempt the following drivers from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41 (b)(10):
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of February and are discussed below:
As of February 9, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 55 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (64 FR 40404; 64 FR 66962; 66 FR 66969; 68 FR 37197; 68 FR 52811; 68 FR 61860; 68 FR 69432; 70 FR 48797; 70 FR 57353; 70 FR 61165; 70 FR 61493; 70 FR 71884; 70 FR 72689; 71 FR 644; 71 FR 4632; 72 FR 8417; 72 FR 36099; 72 FR 39879; 72 FR 52419; 72 FR 54971; 72 FR 58362; 72 FR 62897; 72 FR 64273; 72 FR 67340; 72 FR 67344; 72 FR 71995; 73 FR 1395; 73 FR 6246; 74 FR 37295; 74 FR 48343; 74 FR 49069; 74 FR 53581; 74 FR 57553; 74 FR 60021; 74 FR 60022; 74 FR 62632; 74 FR 65845; 74 FR 65847; 75 FR 1450; 75 FR 4623; 76 FR 37169; 76 FR 50318; 76 FR 62143; 76 FR 64164; 76 FR 64171; 76 FR 70210; 76 FR 70212; 76 FR 70213; 76 FR 70215; 76 FR 75940; 76 FR 78728; 76 FR 79760; 77 FR 541; 77 FR 543; 77 FR 545; 77 FR 3554; 78 FR 27281; 78 FR 34143; 78 FR 41188; 78 FR 47818; 78 FR 52602; 78 FR 62935; 78 FR 63302; 78 FR 63307; 78 FR 64271; 78 FR 64274; 78 FR 66099; 78 FR 67454; 78 FR 67460; 78 FR 68137; 78 FR 74223; 78 FR 76395; 78 FR 76704; 78 FR 76705; 78 FR 76707; 78 FR 77778; 78 FR 77780; 78 FR 77782; 78 FR 78475; 78 FR 78477; 79 FR 2748; 79 FR 3919; 79 FR 4803; 79 FR 53708; 80 FR 14223; 80 FR 33007; 80 FR 33011; 80 FR 40122; 80 FR 49302; 80 FR 50915; 80 FR 59225; 80 FR 59230; 80 FR 62163; 80 FR 63839; 80 FR 63869; 80 FR 67472; 80 FR 67476; 80 FR 67481; 80 FR 70060; 80 FR 76345; 80 FR 80443; 81 FR 1284; 81 FR 11642; 81 FR 15401; 81 FR 15404; 81 FR 16265; 81 FR 60117):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-1999-5748; FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2005-22727; FMCSA-2006-26653; FMCSA-2007-0017; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2007-29019; FMCSA-2009-0154; FMCSA-2009-0303; FMCSA-2011-0140; FMCSA-2011-0275; FMCSA-2011-0298; FMCSA-2013-0028; FMCSA-2013-0029; FMCSA-2013-0165; FMCSA-2013-0166; FMCSA-2013-0167; FMCSA-2013-0168; FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-2013-0170; FMCSA-2014-0304; FMCSA-2015-0053; FMCSA-2015-0056; FMCSA-2015-0070; FMCSA-2015-0071; FMCSA-2015-0072; FMCSA-2015-0344. Their exemptions are applicable as of February 9, 2018, and will expire on February 9, 2020.
As of February 12, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following six individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (81 FR 1474; 81 FR 48493):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2015-0347. Their exemptions are applicable as of February 12, 2018, and will expire on February 12, 2020.
As of February 22, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following two individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (77 FR 539; 77 FR 10608; 79 FR 6993; 81 FR 15401): Brian K. Cline (NC); Mickey Lawson (NC).
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2011-0325. Their exemptions are applicable as of February 22, 2018, and will expire on February 22, 2020.
As of February 27, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Danielle Wilkins (CA) has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (79 FR 1908; 79 FR 14333; 81 FR 15401).
The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0174. The exemption is applicable as of February 27, 2018, and will expire on February 27, 2020.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of applications for exemption; request for comments.
FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 53 individuals for an exemption from the prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) against persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) operating a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable these individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
Comments must be received on or before June 28, 2018.
You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0026 using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for a five-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 five-year period. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The 53 individuals listed in this notice have requested an exemption from the diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). 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.
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding diabetes found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for control. The Agency established the current requirement for diabetes in 1970 because several risk studies indicated that drivers with diabetes had a higher rate of crash involvement than the general population.
FMCSA established its diabetes exemption program, based on the Agency's July 2000 study entitled “A Report to Congress on the Feasibility of a Program to Qualify Individuals with Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus to Operate in Interstate Commerce as Directed by the Transportation Act for the 21st Century.” The report concluded that a safe and practicable protocol to allow some drivers with ITDM to operate CMVs is feasible. The September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441),
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). 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). Section 4129 requires: (1) Elimination of the requirement for three 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 three-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
Mr. Athanas, 68, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Athanas understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Athanas meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Oregon.
Mr. Babcock, 59, has had ITDM since 1999. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Babcock understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Babcock meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Connecticut.
Ms. Baker, 37, has had ITDM since 2017. Her endocrinologist examined her in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Baker understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of her diabetes using insulin,
Mr. Beasley, 67, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Beasley understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Beasley meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Alabama.
Ms. Blackman, 61, has had ITDM since 2017. Her endocrinologist examined her in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Blackman understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of her diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Blackman meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her optometrist examined her in 2018 and certified that she does not have diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from Indiana.
Mr. Boutin, 58, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Boutin understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Boutin meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Georgia.
Mr. Chretien, 55, has had ITDM since 2018. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Chretien understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Chretien meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Louisiana.
Mr. Cost, 62, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Cost understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Cost meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from North Dakota.
Mr. Crump, 54, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Crump understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Crump meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Virginia.
Mr. Cucinotta, 47, has had ITDM since 2001. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Cucinotta understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Cucinotta meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Maine.
Mr. Davis, 49, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five 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 optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Virginia.
Mr. Durand, 55, has had ITDM since 1990. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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
Ms. Erwin, 60, has had ITDM since 2016. Her endocrinologist examined her in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Erwin understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of her diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Erwin meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her optometrist examined her in 2018 and certified that she has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. She holds an operator's license from Tennessee.
Mr. Farnam, 24, has had ITDM since 1997. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Farnam understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Farnam meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Massachusetts.
Mr. Feldt, 66, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Feldt understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Feldt meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.
Mr. Forrest, 26, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Forrest understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Forrest meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C CDL from Pennsylvania.
Mr. Frost, 60, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Frost understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Frost meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Pennsylvania.
Mr. Hegyi, 32, has had ITDM since 1994. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hegyi understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hegyi meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from New Jersey.
Mr. Hernandez, 28, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hernandez understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hernandez meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Illinois.
Mr. Hill, 46, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hill understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hill meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from North Carolina.
Mr. Hinton, 60, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hinton understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hinton meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from New York.
Mr. Johansen, 62, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Johansen understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Johansen meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from North Dakota.
Mr. Jones, 27, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Jones understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Jones meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.
Mr. Jones, 51, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Jones understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Jones meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he has stable proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from North Carolina.
Mr. Kerrigan, 34, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Kerrigan understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kerrigan meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Michigan.
Mr. Koepplin, 54, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Koepplin understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Koepplin meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from North Dakota.
Mr. Kress, 63, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Kress understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kress meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Minnesota.
Eric J. Kuster
Mr. Kuster, 31, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined him in 2016 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Kuster understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kuster meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.
Mr. Labrosse, 50, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Labrosse understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV
Mr. Mason, 33, has had ITDM since 1996. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Mason understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Mason meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Georgia.
Mr. Moore, 36, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Moore understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Moore meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Missouri.
Mr. Morphew, 69, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Morphew understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Morphew meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana.
Mr. Mulvenna, 57, has had ITDM since 1969. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Mulvenna understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Mulvenna meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Jersey.
Mr. Olson, 74, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Olson understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Olson meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from South Dakota.
Ms. Phillips, 42, has had ITDM since 2016. Her endocrinologist examined her in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Phillips understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of her diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Phillips meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her ophthalmologist examined her in 2017 and certified that she does not have diabetic retinopathy. She holds an operator's license from Pennsylvania.
Mr. Price, 71, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Price understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Price meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Mississippi.
Mr. Raben, 26, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Raben understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Raben meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Alabama.
Mr. Segel, 60, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting
Mr. Slattery, 26, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Slattery understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Slattery meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Indiana.
Mr. Smart, 26, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Smart understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smart meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Texas.
Mr. Smith, 54, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five 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 ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative and stable proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Virginia.
Mr. Smith, Jr., 43, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Smith, Jr. understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smith, Jr. meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana.
Mr. Snell, 38, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Snell understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Snell meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Iowa.
Mr. Stephens, 35, has had ITDM since 1997. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Stephens understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Stephens meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Pennsylvania.
Mr. Swasey, 57, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Swasey understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Swasey meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Maine.
Mr. Terpstra, 50, has had ITDM since 1973. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Terpstra understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Terpstra meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
Mr. Thompson, 64, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Thompson understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Thompson meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.
Mr. Thull, 68, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Thull understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Thull meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.
Mr. Thurnall, 39, has had ITDM since 1993. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Thurnall understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Thurnall meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Indiana.
Mr. Tuck, 70, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Tuck understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Tuck meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from New Jersey.
Mr. Wendte, 57, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Wendte understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wendte meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Illinois.
Mr. Westgate, 23, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Westgate understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Westgate meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Idaho.
Mr. Williams, 65, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Williams understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Williams meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Arkansas.
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 dates section of the notice.
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
We will consider all comments and materials received during the comment period. FMCSA may issue a final determination at any time after the close of the comment period.
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this preamble, go to
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of applications for exemption; request for comments.
FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 36 individuals for an exemption from the prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) against persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) operating a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable these individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
Comments must be received on or before June 28, 2018.
You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0028 using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for a five-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 five-year period. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The 36 individuals listed in this notice have requested an exemption from the diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). 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.
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding diabetes found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for control. The Agency established the current requirement for diabetes in 1970 because several risk studies indicated that drivers with diabetes had a higher rate of crash involvement than the general population.
FMCSA established its diabetes exemption program, based on the Agency's July 2000 study entitled “A Report to Congress on the Feasibility of a Program to Qualify Individuals with Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus to Operate in Interstate Commerce as Directed by the Transportation Act for the 21st Century.” The report concluded that a safe and practicable protocol to allow some drivers with ITDM to operate CMVs is feasible. The September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441),
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). 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). Section 4129 requires: (1) Elimination of the requirement for three years of experience operating CMVs while being treated with insulin; and (2) establishment of a specified minimum period of insulin use to demonstrate
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 three-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
Mr. Antunez, 66, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Antunez understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Antunez meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Washington.
Mr. Apel, 65, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Apel understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Apel meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from New York.
Mr. Bartlett, 60, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Bartlett understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Bartlett meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from South Dakota.
Mr. Bell, 54, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Bell understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Bell meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.
Mr. Brady, 57, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Brady understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Brady meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.
Mr. Campbell, 43, has had ITDM since 1989. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Campbell understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Campbell meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he has stable proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana.
Mr. Collett, 61, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Collett understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Collett meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Oklahoma.
Mr. Conrad, 54, has had ITDM since 1987. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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
Mr. Crenshaw, 52, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Crenshaw understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Crenshaw meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Connecticut.
Mr. Crouch, 64, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Crouch understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Crouch meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Oklahoma.
Mr. Doyal, 49, has had ITDM since 1996. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Doyal understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Doyal meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Georgia.
Mr. Duarte, 50, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Duarte understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Duarte meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Alabama.
Mr. Dubia, 60, has had ITDM since 2018. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Dubia understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Dubia meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Hampshire.
Mr. Fellows, 50, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Fellows understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Fellows meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Washington.
Mr. Gall, 59, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Gall understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gall meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from North Dakota.
Mr. Hayter, 58, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hayter understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hayter meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Florida.
Mr. Helms, 63, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Helms understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Helms meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from South Carolina.
Mr. Hopper, 44, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hopper understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hopper meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Oklahoma.
Mr. Hunter, 58, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hunter understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hunter meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.
Mr. Illingsworth, 49, has had ITDM since 2001. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Illingsworth understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Illingsworth meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Pennsylvania.
Mr. Joswak, 47, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Joswak understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Joswak meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Michigan.
Mr. Keas, 59, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Keas understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Keas meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Kansas.
Mr. Leyden, 30, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Leyden understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Leyden meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Nebraska.
Ms. Merchen, 33, has had ITDM since 2018. Her endocrinologist examined her in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Merchen understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of her diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Merchen meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her optometrist examined her in 2018 and certified that she does not have diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class A CDL from Georgia.
Mr. Moore, 64, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Moore understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
Mr. Mowery, 65, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Mowery understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Mowery meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Pennsylvania.
Ms. Moye-Hosey, 69, has had ITDM since 2018. Her endocrinologist examined her in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Moye-Hosey understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of her diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Moye-Hosey meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her ophthalmologist examined her in 2018 and certified that she does not have diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from Ohio.
Ms. Ortiz, 60, has had ITDM since 2017. Her endocrinologist examined her in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Ortiz understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of her diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Ortiz meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her optometrist examined her in 2018 and certified that she does not have diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from New Mexico.
Mr. Pollock, 70, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Pollock understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Pollock meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio.
Mr. Possley, 59, has had ITDM since 1988. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Possley understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Possley meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Wisconsin.
Mr. Sanders, 56, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Sanders understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sanders meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Kansas.
Mr. Schlichte, 68, has had ITDM since 2018. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Schlichte understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Schlichte meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.
Mr. Tuck, 22, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Tuck understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Tuck meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Texas.
Mr. Weinman, 53, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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
Mr. Wessel, 21, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Wessel understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wessel meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Maine.
Mr. Whitman, 53, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Whitman understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Whitman meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from North Carolina.
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 dates section of the notice.
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
We will consider all comments and materials received during the comment period. FMCSA may issue a final determination at any time after the close of the comment period.
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this preamble, go to
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 113 individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in one eye.
Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in the discussions below.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, 202-366-4001,
You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at:
On February 15, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to renew exemptions for 113 individuals from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (83 FR 6922). The public comment period ended on March 19, 2018, and no comments were received.
As stated in the previous notice, FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red, green, and amber.
FMCSA received no comments in this preceding.
Based upon its evaluation of the 113 renewal exemption applications and comments received, FMCSA confirms its' decision to exempt the following drivers from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41 (b)(10):
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of January and are discussed below:
As of January 3, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 56 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (57 FR 57266; 63 FR 66226; 64 FR 16517; 64 FR 40404; 64 FR 54948; 64 FR 66962; 65 FR 159; 65 FR 57230; 66 FR 41656; 66 FR 53826; 66 FR 66966; 66 FR 66969; 67 FR 17102; 68 FR 52811; 68 FR 54775; 68 FR 61860; 68 FR 69432; 68 FR 69434; 69 FR 51346; 69 FR 62741; 70 FR 48797; 70 FR 50799; 70 FR 53412; 70 FR 57353; 70 FR 61165; 70 FR 61493; 70 FR 72689; 70 FR 74102; 71 FR 14566; 71 FR 30227; 71 FR 50970; 71 FR 62147; 71 FR 644; 72 FR 39879; 72 FR 46261; 72 FR 52419; 72 FR 52421; 72 FR 54971; 72 FR 54972; 72 FR 58362; 72 FR 62896; 72 FR 62897; 72 FR 64273; 72 FR 67344; 72 FR 71995; 73 FR 20245; 73 FR 27014; 73 FR 48269; 73 FR 75806; 74 FR 26461; 74 FR 34630; 74 FR 41971; 74 FR 43221; 74 FR 43223; 74 FR 49069; 74 FR 57553; 74 FR 60021; 74 FR 62632; 74 FR 65847; 75 FR 50799; 75 FR 8184; 76 FR 37168; 76 FR 53708; 76 FR 54530; 76 FR 55465; 76 FR 55469; 76 FR 62143; 76 FR 64169; 76 FR 67246; 76 FR 70210; 76 FR 70212; 76 FR 70215; 76 FR 75942; 76 FR 75943; 76 FR 79760; 76 FR 8809; 77 FR 17108; 78 FR 18667; 78 FR 34143; 78 FR 47818; 78 FR 51268; 78 FR 52602; 78 FR 62935; 78 FR 63302; 78 FR 63307; 78 FR 64274; 78 FR 64280; 78 FR 65032; 78 FR 66099; 78 FR 67452; 78 FR 76395; 78 FR 76705; 78 FR 77778; 78 FR 77780; 78 FR 77782; 78 FR 78477; 80 FR 16500; 80 FR 31636; 80 FR 37718; 80 FR 48413; 80 FR 50917; 80 FR 59225; 80 FR 59230; 80 FR 63829; 80 FR 63869; 80 FR 67472; 80 FR 67476; 80 FR 67481; 80 FR 70060; 80 FR 80443; 81 FR 11642; 81 FR 1284; 81 FR 15401; 81 FR 15404; 81 FR 16265):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-1998-4334; FMCSA-1999-5748; FMCSA-1999-6156; FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2006-24015; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2007-28695; FMCSA-2007-29019; FMCSA-2009-0121; FMCSA-2011-0189; FMCSA-2011-26690; FMCSA-2013-0029; FMCSA-2013-0165; FMCSA-2013-0166; FMCSA-2013-0168; FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-2015-0049; FMCSA-2015-0056; FMCSA-2015-0070; FMCSA-2015-0071; FMCSA-2015-0072. Their exemptions are applicable as of January 3, 2018, and will expire on January 3, 2020.
As of January 5, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, George G. Ulferts, Jr. (IA) has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (76 FR 70213; 77 FR 541; 78 FR 74223; 80 FR 80443).
The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2011-0298. The exemption is applicable as of January 5, 2018, and will expire on January 5, 2020.
As of January 8, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2007-0017; FMCSA-2015-0344. Their exemptions are applicable as of January 8, 2018, and will expire on January 8, 2020.
As of January 9, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Juan R. Andrade (TX) has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (78 FR 64271; 79 FR 2748; 80 FR 80443).
The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0167. The exemption is applicable as of January 9, 2018, and will expire on January 9, 2020.
As of January 15, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following eight individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (78 FR 64271; 79 FR 2748; 80 FR 80443):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0167. Their exemptions are applicable as of January 15, 2018, and will expire on January 15, 2020.
As of January 21, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following four individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (80 FR 79414; 81 FR 44680):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2015-0345. Their exemptions are applicable as of January 21, 2018, and will expire on January 21, 2020.
As of January 23, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Leonard A. Martin (NV) has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (78 FR 67454; 79 FR 4803; 81 FR 15401).
The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0170. The exemption is applicable as of January 23, 2018, and will expire on January 23, 2020.
As of January 24, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following five individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (76 FR 70213; 76 FR 73769; 77 FR 3547; 77 FR 541; 79 FR 2247; 80 FR 80443):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2011-0298; FMCSA-2011-0299. Their exemptions are applicable as of January 24, 2018, and will expire on January 24, 2020.
As of January 27, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following nine individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (68 FR 52811; 68 FR 61860; 70 FR 48801; 70 FR 57353; 70 FR 61165; 70 FR 71884; 70 FR 72689; 71 FR 4632; 72 FR 58359; 72 FR 62897; 73 FR 1395; 73 FR 5259; 74 FR 60021; 74 FR 64124; 74 FR 65845; 75 FR 1451; 77 FR 545; 78 FR 78475; 80 FR 80443):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2005-22727. Their exemptions are applicable as of January 27, 2018, and will expire on January 27, 2020.
As of January 28, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following four individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (74 FR 60022; 75 FR 4623; 77 FR 543; 78 FR 76707; 80 FR 80443):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2009-0303. Their exemptions are applicable as of January 28, 2018, and will expire on January 28, 2020.
As of January 29, 2018, 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 vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (78 FR 67454; 79 FR 4803; 80 FR 80443):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0170. Their exemptions are applicable as of January 29, 2018, and will expire on January 29, 2020.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 11 individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for various reasons. The exemptions enable these individuals to operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in one eye.
The exemptions were applicable on March 17, 2018. The exemptions expire on March 17, 2020.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at
On February 14, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of applications from 11 individuals requesting an exemption from vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and requested comments from the public (83 FR 6694). The public comment period ended on March 16, 2018, and no comments were received.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically qualified to driver a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red, green, and amber.
FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) if the exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would be achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows applicants to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is based on medical reports about the applicants' vision as well as their driving records and experience driving with the vision deficiency. The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the February 14, 2018,
FMCSA recognizes that some drivers do not meet the vision requirement but have adapted their driving to accommodate their limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The 11 exemption applicants listed in this notice are in this category. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for various reasons, including amblyopia, aphakia, central serous chorioretinopathy, corneal scarring, prosthesis, and retinal vein occlusion. In most cases, their eye conditions were not recently developed. Nine of the applicants were either born with their vision impairments or have had them since childhood. The two individuals that sustained their vision conditions as adults have had it for a range of 4 to 23 years. Although each applicant has one eye which does not meet the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected vision in the other eye, and in a doctor's opinion, has sufficient vision to perform all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV.
Doctors' opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of a valid license to operate a CMV. By meeting State licensing requirements, the applicants demonstrated their ability to operate a CMV, with their limited vision in intrastate commerce, even though their vision disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. We believe that the applicants' intrastate driving experience and history provide an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive safely in interstate commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate operations, involves substantial driving on highways on the interstate system and on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover, driving in congested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian and vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster reaction to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because distances between them are more compact. These conditions tax visual capacity and driver response just as intensely as interstate driving conditions.
The applicants in this notice have driven CMVs with their limited vision in careers ranging for 5 to 90 years. In the past three years, no drivers were involved in crashes, and one driver was convicted of a moving violation in a CMV. All the applicants achieved a record of safety while driving with their vision impairment, demonstrating the likelihood that they have adapted their driving skills to accommodate their condition. As the applicants' ample driving histories with their vision deficiencies are good predictors of future performance, FMCSA concludes their ability to drive safely can be projected into the future.
Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these applicants from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level
The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1) Each driver must be physically examined every year (a) by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and (b) by a certified Medical Examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) each driver must provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the Medical Examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3) each driver must 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 exemption when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official.
During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with respect to a person operating under the exemption.
Based upon its evaluation of the 11 exemption applications, FMCSA exempts the following drivers from the vision requirement, 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above:
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 169 individuals from its prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) against persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce. The exemptions enable these individuals with ITDM to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in the discussions below.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, 202-366-4001,
You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at:
On January 16, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to renew exemptions for 169 individuals from the insulin-treated diabetes mellitus prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (83 FR 2295). The public comment period ended on February 15, 2018, and no comments were received.
As stated in the previous notice, FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding diabetes found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for control.
FMCSA received no comments in this preceding.
Based upon its evaluation of the 169 renewal exemption applications and comments received, FMCSA confirms its' decision to exempt the following drivers from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce in 49 CFR 391.64(3):
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of November and are discussed below:
As of November 1, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 12 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0183. Their exemptions are applicable as of November 1, 2017, and will expire on November 1, 2019.
As of November 3, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 37 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (80 FR 59237; 80 FR 79401):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2015-0067. Their exemptions are applicable as of November 3, 2017, and will expire on November 3, 2019.
As of November 9, 2017, 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; 80 FR 68895):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2011-0193. Their exemptions are applicable as of November 9, 2017, and will expire on November 9, 2019.
As of November 12, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 19 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; 80 FR 68895):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0186. Their exemptions are applicable as of November 12, 2017, and will expire on November 12, 2019.
As of November 16, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 12 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; 80 FR 68895):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2011-0194. Their exemptions are applicable as of November 16, 2017, and will expire on November 16, 2019.
As of November 17, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 28 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (80 FR 62155; 81 FR 6329):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2015-0069. Their exemptions are applicable as of November 17, 2017, and will expire on November 17, 2019.
As of November 20, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 20 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; 80 FR 68895):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2006-25751. Their exemptions are applicable as of November 20, 2017, and will expire on November 20, 2019.
As of November 21, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 29 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (80 FR 63863; 81 FR 6330):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2015-0068. Their exemptions are applicable as of November 21, 2017, and will expire on November 21, 2019.
As of November 22, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, 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; 80 FR 68895).
This driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0189. The exemption is applicable as of November 22, 2017, and will expire November 22, 2019.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 51 individuals from the prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) against persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. The exemptions enable these individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
The exemptions were applicable on March 17, 2018. The exemptions expire on March 17, 2020.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at:
On February 14, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of applications from 51 individuals requesting an exemption from diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) and requested comments from the public (83 FR 6685). The public comment period ended on March 16, 2018, and five comments were received.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding diabetes found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for control.
FMCSA received five comments in this proceeding. Vicky Johnson stated that Minnesota Department of Public Safety is in favor of granting exemptions to the following Minnesota drivers: Mark S. Schellhammer, Daniel G. Roach, and Donald R. Heupel.
The Motor Vehicle Division (DMV) in the State of Montana reviewed the driving record of Marty G. Niles and
Tommy Friend and Austin Thies stated that they believe anyone who decides to drive a CMV with diabetes should be allowed to do so without discrimination. FMCSA believes that the individualized assessment of exemption applicants addresses the commenter's concern about discrimination, while maintaining an equivalent level of public safety. FMCSA's exemption process supports drivers with ITDM who seek to operate in interstate commerce. In addition, the FMCSRs are not contrary to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. The mandates of the ADA do not require that FMCSA alter the driver qualification requirements contained in 49 CFR part 391. The Senate report on the ADA, submitted by its Committee on Labor and Human Resources, included the following explanation:
With respect to covered entities subject to rules promulgated by the Department of Transportation regarding physical qualifications for drivers of certain classifications of motor vehicles, it is the Committee's intent that a person with a disability applying for or currently holding a job subject to these standards must be able to satisfy these physical qualification standards in order to be considered a qualified individual with a disability under title I of this legislation. S. Rep. 101-116, at 25 (1989).
The Agency's current approach, articulated in this
George Benson states that if a person is truly taking care of their diabetes, it should not take as long as it does to get the exemption and the process does not have to be so difficult. FMCSA is required by statute to complete the application process within 180 days from the date all required information is submitted by the applicant. However, this is often completed well in advance of this timeframe. This timeframe includes time to review application information and meet
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would be achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows the applicants to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is based on the program eligibility criteria and an individualized assessment of information submitted by each applicant. The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the February 14, 2018,
These 51 applicants have had ITDM over a range of 1 to 47 years. These applicants report no severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness or seizure, requiring the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred without warning symptoms, in the past 12 months and no recurrent (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the past five years. In each case, an endocrinologist verified that the driver has demonstrated a willingness to properly monitor and manage his/her diabetes mellitus, received education related to diabetes management, and is on a stable insulin regimen. These drivers report no other disqualifying conditions, including diabetes related complications. Each meets the vision requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these applicants from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.
The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1) Each driver must submit a quarterly monitoring checklist completed by the treating endocrinologist as well as an annual checklist with a comprehensive medical evaluation; (2) each driver must report within two 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) each driver must provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the Medical Examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (4) each driver must provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keeping a copy in his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-employed. The driver must also have a copy of the exemption when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official.
During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with respect to a person operating under the exemption.
Based upon its evaluation of the 51 exemption applications, FMCSA exempts the following drivers from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above:
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than
was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of applications for exemption; request for comments.
FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 37 individuals for an exemption from the prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) against persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) operating a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable these individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
Comments must be received on or before June 28, 2018.
You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0029 using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for a five-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 five-year period. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The 2018-0029 individuals listed in this notice have requested an exemption from the diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). 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.
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding diabetes found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for control. The Agency established the current requirement for diabetes in 1970 because several risk studies indicated that drivers with diabetes had a higher rate of crash involvement than the general population.
FMCSA established its diabetes exemption program, based on the Agency's July 2000 study entitled “A Report to Congress on the Feasibility of a Program to Qualify Individuals with Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus to Operate in Interstate Commerce as Directed by the Transportation Act for the 21st Century.” The report concluded that a safe and practicable protocol to allow some drivers with ITDM to operate CMVs is feasible. The September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441),
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). 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
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 three-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
Mr. Baenziger, 33, has had ITDM since 1996. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Baenziger understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Baenziger meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Colorado.
Mr. Behle, 63, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Behle understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Behle meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.
Mr. Bolton, 21, has had ITDM since 2011. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Bolton understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Bolton meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Alaska.
Mr. Chavez, 32, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Chavez understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Chavez meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from California.
Mr. Clarke, 54, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Clarke understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Clarke meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Nebraska.
Mr. Condon, 58, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Condon understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Condon meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Nebraska.
Mr. Fleming, 70, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Fleming understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Fleming meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Maryland.
Mr. Gore, 28, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Gore understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gore meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Minnesota.
Mr. Gregg, 55, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Gregg understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gregg meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from North Carolina.
Mr. Guzier, 59, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Guzier understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Guzier meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.
Mr. Hammond, 58, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hammond understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hammond meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.
Mr. Hardcastle, 34, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hardcastle understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hardcastle meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Oregon.
Mr. Heck, 51, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Heck understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Heck meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.
Mr. Henderschiedt, 54, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Henderschiedt understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Henderschiedt meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.
Mr. Johnston, 57, has had ITDM since 2018. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Johnston understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Johnston meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.
Mr. Killinger, 47, has had ITDM since 2016. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Killinger understands diabetes management and monitoring,
Mr. Lenhart, 36, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Lenhart understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Lenhart meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Alaska.
Ms. Logsdon, 45, has had ITDM since 2012. Her endocrinologist examined her in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Logsdon understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of her diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Logsdon meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her ophthalmologist examined her in 2018 and certified that she does not have diabetic retinopathy. She holds an operator's license from West Virginia.
Mr. Mc Kinney, 21, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Mc Kinney understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. McKinney meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Ohio.
Mr. McClerren, 47, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. McClerren understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. McClerren meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois.
Mr. Murray, 36, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Murray understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Murray meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Utah.
Mr. Pineda, 50, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Pineda understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Pineda meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Texas.
Mr. Putt, 53, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Putt understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Putt meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Virginia.
Mr. Randall, 61, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Randall understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Randall meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Missouri.
Mr. Reilly, 49, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another person, or
Mr. Rhodes, 25, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Rhodes understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Rhodes meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Louisiana.
Mr. Rosario, 39, has had ITDM since 1998. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Rosario understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Rosario meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Minnesota.
Mr. Shelley, 32, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined him in 2017 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Shelley understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Shelley meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Virginia.
Mr. Smallcanyon, 39, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Smallcanyon understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Smallcanyon meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Utah.
Mr. Sortman, 23, has had ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Sortman understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sortman meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Ohio.
Mr. Suckow, 45, has had ITDM since 2017. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Suckow understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Suckow meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from South Dakota.
Mr. Terrio, 60, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Terrio understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Terrio meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Louisiana.
Mr. Van Koevering, 53, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Van Koevering understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Van Koevering meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
Mr. Vandyken, 34, has had ITDM since 2018. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Vandyken understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Vandyken meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Montana.
Mr. Westfall, 35, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Westfall understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Westfall meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2018 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Ohio.
Mr. Willis Sloan, 48, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined him in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Willis Sloan understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Willis Sloan meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2017 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an Operator's License from Missouri.
Ms. Wiss, 61, has had ITDM since 2016. Her endocrinologist examined her in 2018 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 (two or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last five years. Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Wiss understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of her diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Wiss meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her optometrist examined her in 2018 and certified that she does not have diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from Washington.
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 dates section of the notice.
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
We will consider all comments and materials received during the comment period. FMCSA may issue a final determination at any time after the close of the comment period.
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this preamble, go to
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 133 individuals from its prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) against persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce. The exemptions enable these individuals with ITDM to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in the discussions below. Comments must be received on or before June 28, 2018.
You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0071; FMCSA-2012-0044; FMCSA-2012-0107; FMCSA-2014-0015; FMCSA-2014-0016; FMCSA-
•
•
•
•
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, 202-366-4001,
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption for five years 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 five-year period. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding diabetes found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for control.
The 133 individuals listed in this notice have requested renewal of their exemptions from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), in accordance with FMCSA procedures. Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated these applications for renewal on their merits and decided to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period.
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.
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. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 133 applicants has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the diabetes requirement (73 FR 16946; 73 FR 31734; 77 FR 20876; 77 FR 27842; 77 FR 33264; 77 FR 38383; 79 FR 22573; 79 FR 29484; 79 FR 35855; 79 FR 42628; 81 FR 25486; 81 FR 28121; 81 FR 59728; 81 FR 66733; 81 FR 96176). 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 two-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 these drivers for a period of two years is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of June and are discussed below:
As of June 1, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 33 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (81 FR 25486; 81 FR 66733):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2016-0037. Their exemptions are applicable as of June 1, 2018, and will expire on June 1, 2020.
As of June 3, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following eight individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2008-0071. Their exemptions are applicable as of June 3, 2018, and will expire on June 3, 2020.
As of June 5, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following nine individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (77 FR 20876; 77 FR 33264; 81 FR 96176):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2012-0044. Their exemptions are applicable as of June 5, 2018, and will expire on June 5, 2020.
As of June 9, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 40 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (81 FR 28121; 81 FR 59728):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2016-0039. Their exemptions are applicable as of June 9, 2018, and will expire on June 9, 2020.
As of June 20, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Gary R. Harper, (IN) has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (79 FR 29484; 79 FR 42628; 81 FR 96176).
The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0016. The exemption is applicable as of June 20, 2018, and will expire on June 20, 2020.
As of June 24, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 35 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (79 FR 22573; 79 FR 35855; 81 FR 96176):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0015. Their exemptions are applicable as of June 24, 2018, and will expire on June 24, 2020.
As of June 26, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Tommy R. Riley, (IL) has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (79 FR 29484; 79 FR 42628; 81 FR 96176).
The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0016. The exemption is applicable as of June 26, 2018, and will expire on June 26, 2020.
As of June 27, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following six individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (77 FR 27842; 77 FR 38383; 81 FR 96176):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2012-0107. Their exemptions are applicable as of June 27, 2018, and will expire on June 27, 2020.
The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions: (1) Each driver must submit a quarterly monitoring checklist completed by the treating endocrinologist as well as an annual checklist with a comprehensive medical evaluation; (2) each driver must report within two 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) each driver must submit an annual ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report; and (4) each driver must 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
During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with respect to a person operating under the exemption.
Based upon its evaluation of the 133 exemption applications, FMCSA renews the exemptions of the aforementioned drivers from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for nine individuals from the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers have “no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.” The exemptions enable these individuals who have had one or more seizures and are taking anti-seizure medication to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
The exemptions were applicable on January 21, 2018. The exemptions expire on January 21, 2020.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001, f
You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at:
On February 27, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to renew exemptions for nine individuals from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (83 FR 8568). The public comment period ended on March 29, 2018 and one comment was received.
As stated in the previous notice, FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.
In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory criteria to assist Medical Examiners in determining whether drivers with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in interstate commerce. [49 CFR part 391, APPENDIX A TO PART 391—MEDICAL ADVISORY CRITERIA, section H. Epilepsy: § 391.41(b)(8), paragraphs 3, 4, and 5.]
FMCSA received one comment in this proceeding. This comment supported FMCSA's decision to grant these exemptions to drivers with seizure disorders.
Based upon its evaluation of the nine renewal exemption applications and comments received, FMCSA announces its' decision to exempt the following drivers from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41 (b)(8):
As of March 29, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following nine individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers. (83 FR 8568):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2012-0050; FMCSA-2015-0119; FMCSA-2015-0320. Their exemptions are applicable as of January 21, 2018, and will expire on January 21, 2020.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of applications for exemption; request for comments.
FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 12 individuals for an exemption from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions will enable these individuals to operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in one eye.
Comments must be received on or before June 28, 2018.
You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0011 using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for a five-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 five-year period. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The 12 individuals listed in this notice have requested an exemption from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications of each applicant to determine whether granting an exemption will achieve the required level of safety mandated by statute.
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal Meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing standard red, green, and amber.
In July 1992, the Agency first published the criteria for the Vision Waiver Program, which listed the conditions and reporting standards that CMV drivers approved for participation would need to meet (Qualification of Drivers; Vision Waivers, 57 FR 31458, July 16, 1992). The current Vision Exemption Program was established in 1998, following the enactment of amendments to the statutes governing exemptions made by § 4007 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), Public Law 105-178, 112 Stat. 107, 401 (June 9, 1998). Vision exemptions are considered under the procedures established in 49 CFR part 381 subpart C, on a case-by-case basis upon application by CMV drivers who do not meet the vision standards of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
To qualify for an exemption from the vision requirement, FMCSA requires a person to present verifiable evidence that he/she has driven a commercial vehicle safely with the vision deficiency for the past three years. Recent driving performance is especially important in evaluating future safety, according to several research studies designed to correlate past and future driving performance. Results of these studies support the principle that the best predictor of future performance by a driver is his/her past record of crashes and traffic violations. Copies of the studies may be found at Docket Number FMCSA-1998-3637.
FMCSA believes it can properly apply the principle to monocular drivers, because data from the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) former waiver study program clearly demonstrated the driving performance of experienced monocular drivers in the program is better than that of all CMV drivers collectively (See 61 FR 13338, 13345, March 26, 1996). The fact that experienced monocular drivers demonstrated safe driving records in the waiver program supports a conclusion that other monocular drivers, meeting the same qualifying conditions as those required by the waiver program, are also likely to have adapted to their vision
The first major research correlating past and future performance was done in England by Greenwood and Yule in 1920. Subsequent studies, building on that model, concluded that crash rates for the same individual exposed to certain risks for two different time periods vary only slightly (See Bates and Neyman, University of California Publications in Statistics, April 1952). Other studies demonstrated theories of predicting crash proneness from crash history coupled with other factors. These factors—such as age, sex, geographic location, mileage driven and conviction history—are used every day by insurance companies and motor vehicle bureaus to predict the probability of an individual experiencing future crashes (See Weber, Donald C., “Accident Rate Potential: An Application of Multiple Regression Analysis of a Poisson Process,” Journal of American Statistical Association, June 1971). A 1964 California Driver Record Study prepared by the California Department of Motor Vehicles concluded that the best overall crash predictor for both concurrent and nonconcurrent events is the number of single convictions. This study used three consecutive years of data, comparing the experiences of drivers in the first two years with their experiences in the final year.
Mr. Davis, 63, has had a central retinal vein occlusion in his right eye since 2012. The visual acuity in his right eye is hand motion, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2018, his ophthalmologist stated, “In my medical opinion, this gentleman has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.” Mr. Davis reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for five years, accumulating 550,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from North Carolina. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
Mr. Giles, 39, has had amblyopia in his right eye since birth. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/15, and in his left eye, 20/50. Following an examination in 2018, his ophthalmologist stated, “In my medical opinion, Mr. Giles has sufficient vision to perform driving tasks required to operate commercial vehicles.” Mr. Giles reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 17 years, accumulating 1.02 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from North Carolina. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
Mr. Haubert, 41, has a prosthetic right eye due to a traumatic incident in 2013. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following an examination in 2018, his optometrist stated, “Michael, it is in my medical opinion you have sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks necessary to operate a commercial vehicle.” Mr. Haubert reported that he has driven straight trucks for 17 years, accumulating 221,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 17 years, accumulating 85,00 miles. He holds a Class ABCD CDL from Wisconsin. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
Mr. Krentz, 30, has had optic atrophy in his right eye due to a traumatic incident in 2003. The visual acuity in his right eye is light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2018, his optometrist stated, “I, Timothy J. Goldsmith, Optometrist certify in my medical opinion that Thomas Krentz has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.” Mr. Krentz reported that he has driven straight trucks for 13 years, accumulating 130,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 13 years, accumulating 455,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
Mr. Lamp, 45, has a prosthetic left eye due to a traumatic incident in 1984. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following an examination in 2018, his optometrist stated, “Overall I feel that Mr. Lamp has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.” Mr. Lamp reported that he has driven straight trucks for 20 years, accumulating 500,000 miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 16 years, accumulating 400,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from West Virginia. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
Mr. Lathrop, 57, has had amblyopia in his left eye since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/400. Following an examination in 2018, his optometrist stated, “In my opinion, Jeff has sufficient vision to operate a commercial vehicle.” Mr. Lathrop reported that he has driven straight trucks for 29 years, accumulating 1.45 million miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 29 years, accumulating 1.45 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from North Carolina. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
Mr. Odrick, 53, has had amblyopia in his right eye since birth. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/150, and in his left eye, 20/15. Following an examination in 2018, his optometrist stated, “Patient has sufficient vision to drive a commercial vehicle.”
Mr. Odrick reported that he has driven buses for 29 years, accumulating 471,250 miles. He holds an operator's license from Delaware. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
Mr. Powell, 54, has had iris coloboma in his left eye due to a traumatic incident in childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, 20/800. Following an examination in 2018, his optometrist stated, “In my medical opinion, Mr. Jim Powell has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.” Mr. Powell reported that he has driven straight trucks for 25 years, accumulating 1.25 million miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for 11 years, accumulating 550,000 miles. He holds a Class AM CDL from Illinois. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
Mr. Smith, 63, has a prosthetic left eye due to a traumatic incident in childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following an examination in 2018, his ophthalmologist stated, “In my opinion as an ophthalmologist, he has more than sufficient vision to perform driving tasks of operating a commercial vehicle using dual mirrors.”
Mr. Stahmer, 33, has had amblyopia in his right eye since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2018, his optometrist stated, “In my medical opinion, Mr. Stahmer has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.” Mr. Stahmer reported that he has driven straight trucks for ten years, accumulating 1.04 million miles, and tractor-trailer combinations for six years, accumulating 168,480 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Montana. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
Mr. Tanksley, 40, has had amblyopia in his right eye since childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/150, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2017, his ophthalmologist stated, “His visual field with both eyes open is normal along with a 120-degree horizontal axis and in my medical opinion, the vision out of his good eye is sufficient to operate a commercial vehicle.” Mr. Tanksley reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for eight years, accumulating 760,000 miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Georgia. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
Mr. Thomas, 44, has a prosthetic right eye due to a traumatic incident in 2002. The visual acuity in his right eye is no light perception, and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2018, his optometrist stated, “Patient has sufficient vision in his left eye to operate a commercial vehicle.” Mr. Thomas reported that he has driven tractor-trailer combinations for 20 years, accumulating 1.1 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL from North Carolina. His driving record for the last three years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.
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 and material received before the close of business on the closing date indicated in the dates section of the notice.
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
We will consider all comments and materials received during the comment period. FMCSA may issue a final determination at any time after the close of the comment period.
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this preamble, go to
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 85 individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in one eye.
Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in the discussions below.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, 202-366-4001,
You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at:
On February 15, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to renew exemptions for 85 individuals from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (83 FR 6919). The public comment period ended on March 19, 2018, and no comments were received.
As stated in the previous notice, FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red, green, and amber.
FMCSA received no comments in this preceding.
Based upon its evaluation of the 85 renewal exemption applications and comments received, FMCSA confirms its' decision to exempt the following driver from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41 (b)(10):
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of March and are discussed below:
As of March 2, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 49 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (64 FR 27027; 64 FR 51568; 66 FR 48504; 66 FR 53826; 66 FR 66966; 68 FR 10301; 68 FR 19596; 68 FR 54775; 68 FR 69434; 70 FR 25878; 70 FR 48797; 70 FR 48798; 70 FR 48799; 70 FR 48800; 70 FR 53412; 70 FR 57353; 70 FR 71884; 70 FR 72689; 70 FR 74102; 71 FR 4632; 71 FR 32183; 71 FR 41310; 72 FR 32705; 72 FR 46261; 72 FR 54972; 72 FR 62896; 72 FR 67340; 73 FR 1395; 73 FR 5259; 73 FR 6246; 73 FR 60398; 74 FR 26464; 74 FR 43222; 74 FR 53581; 74 FR 60021; 74 FR 60022; 74 FR 65842; 74 FR 65845; 75 FR 1450; 75 FR 1451; 75 FR 4623; 75 FR 9482; 76 FR 34135; 76 FR 37169; 76 FR 50318; 76 FR 53710; 76 FR 64171; 76 FR 75942; 76 FR 75943; 76 FR 78728; 77 FR 539; 77 FR 543; 77 FR 545; 77 FR 3554; 77 FR 10604; 77 FR 10608; 78 FR 63302; 78 FR 64274; 78 FR 67452; 78 FR 67454; 78 FR 68137; 78 FR 76704; 78 FR 76705; 78 FR 76707; 78 FR 77778; 78 FR 77780; 78 FR 77782; 78 FR 78475; 78 FR 78477; 79 FR 3919; 79 FR 4531; 79 FR 4803; 79 FR 6993; 79 FR 10619; 80 FR 40122; 80 FR 44188; 80 FR 59230; 80 FR 62161; 80 FR 62163; 80 FR 67476; 80 FR 67481; 80 FR 70060; 80 FR 76345; 80 FR 79414; 80 FR 80443; 81 FR 1284; 81 FR 1474; 81 FR 15401; 81 FR 15404; 81 FR 16265; 81 FR 20433; 81 FR 44680; 81 FR 48493; 81 FR 60117):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2003-14223; FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2005-22727; FMCSA-2006-24783; FMCSA-2007-0017; FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2009-0291; FMCSA-2009-0303; FMCSA-2011-0140; FMCSA-2011-0141; FMCSA-2011-0325; FMCSA-2013-0168; FMCSA-2013-0169; FMCSA-2013-0170; FMCSA-2015-0053; FMCSA-2015-0055; FMCSA-2015-0056; FMCSA-2015-0070; FMCSA-2015-0072; FMCSA-2015-0344; FMCSA-2015-0345; FMCSA-2015-0347. Their exemptions are applicable as of March 2, 2018, and will expire on March 2, 2020.
As of March 5, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following six individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (68 FR 74699; 69 FR 10503; 70 FR 57353; 70 FR 72689; 71 FR 6829; 73 FR 8392; 75 FR 8184; 77 FR 7233; 79 FR 10602; 81 FR 20433):
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2003-16564; FMCSA-2005-22194. Their exemptions are applicable as of March 5, 2018, and will expire on March 5, 2020.
As of March 7, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following three individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (77 FR 3552; 77 FR 13691; 79 FR 12565; 81 FR 20433): Samuel V. Holder (IL); Jake F. Richter (KS); Robert J. Townsley (VA).
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2011-0365. Their
As of March 10, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following nine individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (81 FR 6573; 81 FR 28136):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2015-0348. Their exemptions are applicable as of March 10, 2018, and will expire on March 10, 2020.
As of March 13, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following nine individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (79 FR 1908; 79 FR 14333; 81 FR 20433):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0174. Their exemptions are applicable as of March 13, 2018, and will expire on March 13, 2020.
As of March 15, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following three individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (67 FR 68719; 68 FR 2629; 70 FR 7545; 71 FR 4194; 71 FR 13450; 72 FR 40362; 73 FR 9158; 74 FR 64124; 75 FR 9484; 77 FR 10606; 79 FR 14328; 81 FR 20433): Gene Bartlett, Jr. (VT); Wayne H. Holt (UT); William B. Wilson (KY).
The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2002-12844; FMCSA-2005-23099. Their exemptions are applicable as of March 15, 2018, and will expire on March 15, 2020.
As of March 23, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Glenn R. Theis (MN) has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (77 FR 5874; 77 FR 17117; 79 FR 13085; 81 FR 20433).
The driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2011-0366. The exemption is applicable as of March 23, 2018, and will expire on March 23, 2020.
As of March 31, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following five individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (73 FR 6242; 73 FR 16950; 75 FR 9477; 77 FR 13689; 79 FR 14331; 81 FR 20433):
The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2007-0071. Their exemptions are applicable as of March 31, 2018, and will expire on March 31, 2020.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 14 individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for various reasons. The exemptions enable these individuals to operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in one eye.
The exemptions were applicable on February 16, 2018. The exemptions expire on February 16, 2020.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at
On January 16, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of applications from 14 individuals requesting an exemption from vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and requested comments from the public (83 FR 2292). The public comment period ended on February 15, 2018, and no comments were received.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red, green, and amber.
FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) if the exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would be achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows applicants to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is based on medical reports about the applicants' vision as well as their driving records and experience driving with the vision deficiency. The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the January 16, 2018,
FMCSA recognizes that some drivers do not meet the vision requirement but have adapted their driving to accommodate their limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The 14 exemption applicants listed in this notice are in this category. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for various reasons, including amblyopia, glaucoma, macular scarring, prosthesis, optic atrophy, retinal detachment, retinal scarring, and retinal vein occlusion. In most cases, their eye conditions were not recently developed. Seven of the applicants were either born with their vision impairments or have had them since childhood. The seven individuals that sustained their vision conditions as adults have had it for a range of 9 to 31 years. Although each applicant has one eye which does not meet the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected vision in the other eye, and in a doctor's opinion, has sufficient vision to perform all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV.
Doctors' opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of a valid license to operate a CMV. By meeting State licensing requirements, the applicants demonstrated their ability to operate a CMV, with their limited vision in intrastate commerce, even though their vision disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. We believe that the applicants' intrastate driving experience and history provide an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive safely in interstate commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate operations, involves substantial driving on highways on the interstate system and on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover, driving in congested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian and vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster reaction to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because distances between them are more compact. These conditions tax visual capacity and driver response just as intensely as interstate driving conditions.
The applicants in this notice have driven CMVs with their limited vision in careers ranging for 5 to 78 years. In the past three years, one driver was involved in a crash, and one driver was convicted of a moving violation in a CMV. All the applicants achieved a record of safety while driving with their vision impairment, demonstrating the likelihood that they have adapted their driving skills to accommodate their condition. As the applicants' ample driving histories with their vision deficiencies are good predictors of future performance, FMCSA concludes their ability to drive safely can be projected into the future.
Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these applicants from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.
The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1) each driver must be physically examined every year (a) by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and (b) by a certified Medical Examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) each driver must provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the Medical Examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3) each driver must 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 exemption when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official.
During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with respect to a person operating under the exemption.
Based upon its evaluation of the 14 exemption applications, FMCSA exempts the following drivers from the vision requirement, 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above:
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Treasury.
Notice and request for comment.
The OCC, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on a continuing information collection as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).
In accordance with the requirements of the PRA, the OCC may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
The OCC is soliciting comment concerning the renewal of its information collection titled “International Regulation.” The OCC also is giving notice that it has sent the collection to OMB for review.
Comments must be received by June 28, 2018.
Commenters are encouraged to submit comments by email, if possible. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Additionally, please send a copy of your comments by mail to: OCC Desk Officer, 1557-0102, U.S. Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW, #10235, Washington, DC 20503 or by email to
You may review comments and other related materials that pertain to this information collection
•
• For assistance in navigating
•
OCC Clearance Officer, (202) 649-5490 or, for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (202) 649-5597, Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.
Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the OMB for each collection of information that they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) to include agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. The OCC asks OMB to extend its approval of the following collection.
A national bank shall notify the OCC when it files an application, notice, or report with the FRB
In practice, the OCC also has required an application pursuant to § 28.3(c) from a national bank seeking to join a foreign exchange, clearinghouse, or similar type of organization. In lieu of a notice, the OCC may accept a copy of an application, notice, or report submitted to another federal agency that covers the proposed action and contains substantially the same information required by the OCC. A national bank shall furnish the OCC with any additional information the OCC may require in connection with the national bank's foreign operations.
A foreign bank shall aggregate business transacted by all federal branches and agencies with the business transacted by all state branches and agencies controlled by the foreign bank in determining its compliance with limitations based upon the capital of the foreign bank. A foreign bank shall designate one federal branch or agency office in the United States to maintain consolidated information so that the OCC can monitor compliance.
A foreign bank should require its depository bank to segregate its capital equivalency deposits on the depository bank's books and records. The instruments making up the capital equivalency deposit that are placed in
A foreign bank may apply to the OCC for an exemption to permit an uninsured federal branch to accept or maintain deposit accounts that are not listed in § 28.16(b). The request should describe the types, sources, and estimated amount of such deposits and explain why the OCC should grant an exemption, and how the exemption maintains and furthers the policies described in § 28.16(a).
A foreign bank that has more than one federal branch in the same state may aggregate deposits in all of its federal branches in that state, but exclude deposits of other branches, agencies, or wholly owned subsidiaries of the bank. The federal branch shall compute the average amount by using the sum of deposits as of the close of business of the last 30 calendar days ending with, and including, the last day of the calendar quarter, divided by 30. The federal branch shall maintain records of the calculation until its next examination by the OCC.
Each federal branch or agency shall maintain a set of accounts and records reflecting its transactions that are separate from those of the foreign bank and any other branch or agency. The federal branch or agency shall keep a set of accounts and records in English sufficient to permit the OCC to examine the condition of the federal branch or agency and its compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
The OCC may require a foreign bank to hold certain assets in the state in which its federal branch or agency is located.
The federal branch or agency shall send the OCC certification that all of its Reports of Examination have been destroyed or return its Reports of Examination to the OCC.
The OCC issued a notice for 60 days of comment on February 2, 2018, 83 FR 4956. No comments were received. Comments continue to be invited on:
(a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the OCC, including whether the information has practical utility;
(b) The accuracy of the OCC's estimate of the burden of the collection of information;
(c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e) Estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice and request for comments.
The Internal Revenue Service, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning a notice regarding repayment of a buyout prior to re-employment with the Federal Government.
Written comments should be received on or before July 30, 2018 to be assured of consideration.
Direct all written comments to Roberto Mora-Figueroa, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6129, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224. Requests for additional information or copies of the regulations should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala, at Internal Revenue Service, Room 6129, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224, or through the internet, at
The following paragraph applies to all the collections of information covered by this notice:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number.
Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained if their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the ICR for OMB approval of the extension of the information collection; they will also become a matter of public record.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice and request for comments.
The Internal Revenue Service, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Form 8508, Request for Waiver from Filing Information Returns Electronically.
Written comments should be received on or before July 30, 2018 to be assured of consideration.
Direct all written comments to Roberto Mora-Figueroa, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6129, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224. Requests for additional information or copies of the regulations should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala, at Internal Revenue Service, Room 6129, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224, or through the internet, at
The following paragraph applies to all the collections of information covered by this notice:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained if their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the ICR for OMB approval of the extension of the information collection; they will also become a matter of public record.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice and request for comments.
The Internal Revenue Service, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Revenue Procedure 97-15, section 103-Remedial Payment Closing Agreement Program.
Written comments should be received on or before July 30, 2018 to be assured of consideration.
Direct all written comments to Roberto Mora-Figueroa, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6129, 1111
The following paragraph applies to all the collections of information covered by this notice:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number.
Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained if their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice of Advisory Committee Charter Renewals.
In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee ACT (FACA) and after consultation with the General Services Administration, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs has determined that the following Federal advisory committee is vital to the mission of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and renewing its charter would be in the public interest. Consequently, the charter for the following Federal advisory committee is renewed for a two-year period, beginning on the dates listed below:
The Secretary also determined that the following Federal advisory committee is vital to VA and reestablished its charter:
The Secretary has also renewed the charter for the following statutorily authorized Federal advisory committee for a two-year period, beginning on the date listed below:
Jeffrey Moragne, Committee Management Office, Department of Veterans Affairs, Advisory Committee Management Office (00AC), 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420; telephone (202) 266-4660; or email at
Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
Proposed rule.
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, propose to open 3 National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs) to hunting, open 1 NWR to sport fishing, increase the hunting activities available at 26 NWRs, increase sport fishing activities at 4 NWRs, and add pertinent refuge-specific regulations for other NWRs that pertain to migratory game bird hunting, upland game hunting, big game hunting, and sport fishing for the 2018-2019 season. Through these openings and expansions, we are proposing to open or expand an additional 248,000 acres to hunting and sport fishing within the Refuge System resulting in an estimated increase of 17,575 user days yielding approximately $711,000 in recreation-related expenditures. By having ripple effects throughout the economy, these direct expenditures yield a total economic impact of approximately $1.6 million. We also request public comments on the changes we made in our 2017-2018 season final rule concerning adding regulations for upland and big game hunting for Kankakee National Wildlife Refuge in Illinois.
We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before June 28, 2018.
You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
•
•
We will not accept email or faxes. We will post all comments on
Katherine Harrigan, (703) 358-2440.
The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 closes NWRs in all States except Alaska to all uses until opened. The Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) may open refuge areas to any use, including hunting and/or sport fishing, upon a determination that the use is compatible with the purposes of the refuge and National Wildlife Refuge System mission. The action also must be in accordance with provisions of all laws applicable to the areas, developed in coordination with the appropriate State fish and wildlife agency(ies), consistent with the principles of sound fish and wildlife management and administration, and otherwise in the public interest. These requirements ensure that we maintain the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.
We annually review refuge hunting and sport fishing programs to determine whether to include additional refuges or whether individual refuge regulations governing existing programs need modifications. Changing environmental conditions, State and Federal regulations, and other factors affecting fish and wildlife populations and habitat may warrant modifications to refuge-specific regulations to ensure the continued compatibility of hunting and sport fishing programs and to ensure that these programs will not materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of refuge purposes or the Refuge System's mission.
Provisions governing hunting and sport fishing on refuges are in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations in part 32 (50 CFR part 32). We regulate hunting and sport fishing on refuges to:
• Ensure compatibility with refuge purpose(s);
• Properly manage fish and wildlife resource(s);
• Protect other refuge values;
• Ensure refuge visitor safety; and
• Provide opportunities for quality fish- and wildlife-dependent recreation.
On many refuges where we decide to allow hunting and sport fishing, our general policy of adopting regulations identical to State hunting and sport fishing regulations is adequate in meeting these objectives. On other refuges, we must supplement State regulations with more-restrictive Federal regulations to ensure that we meet our management responsibilities, as outlined in the Statutory Authority section, below. We issue refuge-specific hunting and sport fishing regulations when we open wildlife refuges to migratory game bird hunting, upland game hunting, big game hunting, or sport fishing. These regulations may list the wildlife species that you may hunt or fish, seasons, bag or creel (container for carrying fish) limits, methods of hunting or sport fishing, descriptions of areas open to hunting or sport fishing, and other provisions as appropriate. You may find previously issued refuge-specific regulations for hunting and sport fishing in 50 CFR part 32. In this rulemaking, we are also proposing to standardize and clarify the language of existing regulations.
The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee, as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 [Improvement Act]) (Administration Act), and the Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 (16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4) (Recreation Act) govern the administration and public use of refuges.
Amendments enacted by the Improvement Act built upon the Administration Act in a manner that provides an “organic act” for the Refuge System, similar to organic acts that exist for other public Federal lands. The Improvement Act serves to ensure that we effectively manage the Refuge System as a national network of lands, waters, and interests for the protection and conservation of our Nation's wildlife resources. The Administration Act states first and foremost that we focus our Refuge System mission on conservation of fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats. The Improvement Act requires the Secretary, before allowing a new use of a refuge, or before expanding, renewing, or extending an existing use of a refuge, to determine that the use is compatible with the purpose for which the refuge was established and the mission of the Refuge System. The Improvement Act established as the policy of the United
The Recreation Act authorizes the Secretary to administer areas within the Refuge System for public recreation as an appropriate incidental or secondary use only to the extent that doing so is practicable and not inconsistent with the primary purpose(s) for which Congress and the Service established the areas. The Recreation Act requires that any recreational use of refuge lands be compatible with the primary purpose(s) for which we established the refuge and not inconsistent with other previously authorized operations.
The Administration Act and Recreation Act also authorize the Secretary to issue regulations to carry out the purposes of the Acts and regulate uses.
We develop specific management plans for each refuge prior to opening it to hunting or sport fishing. In many cases, we develop refuge-specific regulations to ensure the compatibility of the programs with the purpose(s) for which we established the refuge and the Refuge System mission. We ensure initial compliance with the Administration Act and the Recreation Act for hunting and sport fishing on newly acquired refuges through an interim determination of compatibility made at or near the time of acquisition. These regulations ensure that we make the determinations required by these acts prior to adding refuges to the lists of areas open to hunting and sport fishing in 50 CFR part 32. We ensure continued compliance by the development of comprehensive conservation plans and step-down management plans, and by annual review of hunting and sport fishing programs and regulations.
This document proposes to codify in the Code of Federal Regulations all of the Service's hunting and/or sport fishing regulations that we would update since the last time we published a rule amending these regulations (82 FR 51940; November 8, 2017) and that are applicable at Refuge System units previously opened to hunting and/or sport fishing. We propose this to better inform the general public of the regulations at each refuge, to increase understanding and compliance with these regulations, and to make enforcement of these regulations more efficient. In addition to now finding these regulations in 50 CFR part 32, visitors to our refuges may find them reiterated in literature distributed by each refuge or posted on signs.
The changes for the 2018-2019 hunting/fishing season noted in the chart above are each based on a complete administrative record which, among other detailed documentation, also includes a hunt plan, a compatibility determination, and the appropriate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321
For health reasons, anglers should review and follow State-issued consumption advisories before enjoying recreational sport fishing opportunities on Service-managed waters. You can find information about current fish-consumption advisories on the internet at:
You may submit comments and materials on this proposed rule by any one of the methods listed in
We will post your entire comment on
In our November 8, 2017, final rule (82 FR 51940), we added changes to Kankakee NWR in Illinois that were not included in our August 10, 2017, proposed rule (82 FR 37398). Specifically, we added regulations for upland and big game hunting for Kankakee National Wildlife Refuge to 50 CFR 32.32 (Illinois) based on a pre-acquisition compatibility determination. In this proposed rule, we request public comments on the changes we made to the regulations for Kankakee NWR in our November 8, 2017, final rule; please see that rule for more information.
Department of the Interior policy is, whenever practicable, to afford the public a meaningful opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process. We open refuges through a series of stages, with the fundamental work being performed on the ground at the refuge and in the community where the program is administered. In these stages, we give the public other opportunities to comment, for example, on comprehensive conservation plans and compatibility determinations. The second stage is this document, when we publish the proposed rule in the
There is nothing contained in this proposed rule outside the scope of the annual review process where we determine whether individual refuges need modifications, deletions, or additions made to them. We make every attempt to collect all of the proposals from the refuges nationwide and process them expeditiously to maximize the time available for public review. A 30-day comment period, through the broader publication following the earlier public involvement, gives the public sufficient time to comment and allows us to establish hunting and fishing programs in time for the upcoming seasons. Many of these rules would also relieve restrictions and allow the public to participate in recreational activities on a number of refuges. In addition, in order to continue to provide for previously authorized hunting opportunities while at the same time providing for adequate resource protection, we must be timely in providing modifications to certain hunting programs on some refuges.
We considered providing a 60-day, rather than a 30-day, comment period. However, we determined that an additional 30-day delay in processing these refuge-specific hunting and sport fishing regulations would hinder the effective planning and administration of our hunting and sport fishing programs. Such a delay would jeopardize enacting amendments to hunting and sport fishing programs in time for implementation this year and/or early next year, or shorten the duration of these programs.
Even after issuance of a final rule, we accept comments, suggestions, and concerns for consideration for any appropriate subsequent rulemaking.
When finalized, we will incorporate these regulations into 50 CFR part 32. Part 32 contains general provisions and refuge-specific regulations for hunting and sport fishing on refuges.
Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and the Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, require us to write all rules in plain language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us comments by one of the methods listed in
This proposed rule is not an Executive Order (E.O.) 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) regulatory action because this proposed rule is not significant under E.O. 12866.
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rulemaking is not significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended by the Small Business
This proposed rule adds 4 NWRs to the list of refuges open to sport fishing and hunting and increases hunting or fishing activities on 26 additional national wildlife refuges. As a result, visitor use for wildlife-dependent recreation on these NWRs will change. If the refuges establishing new programs were a pure addition to the current supply of those activities, it would mean an estimated increase of 17,575 user days (one person per day participating in a recreational opportunity, Table 2). Because the participation trend is flat in these activities since 1991, this increase in supply will most likely be offset by other sites losing participants. Therefore, this is likely to be a substitute site for the activity and not necessarily an increase in participation rates for the activity.
To the extent visitors spend time and money in the area of the refuge that they would not have spent there anyway, they contribute new income to the regional economy and benefit local businesses. Due to the unavailability of site-specific expenditure data, we use the national estimates from the 2011 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation to identify expenditures for food and lodging, transportation, and other incidental expenses. Using the average expenditures for these categories with the maximum expected additional participation of the Refuge System yields approximately $711,000 in recreation-related expenditures (Table 2). By having ripple effects throughout the economy, these direct expenditures are only part of the economic impact of these recreational activities. Using a national impact multiplier for hunting activities (2.27) derived from the report “Hunting in America: An Economic Force for Conservation” and for fishing activities (2.40) derived from the report “Sportfishing in America” yields a total economic impact of approximately $1.6 million (2017 dollars) (Southwick Associates, Inc., 2012). Using a local impact multiplier would yield more accurate and smaller results. However, we employed the national impact multiplier due to the difficulty in developing local multipliers for each specific region.
Since we know that most of the fishing and hunting occurs within 100 miles of a participant's residence, then it is unlikely that most of this spending would be “new” money coming into a local economy; therefore, this spending would be offset with a decrease in some other sector of the local economy. The
Small businesses within the retail trade industry (such as hotels, gas stations, taxidermy shops, bait-and-tackle shops, and similar businesses) may be affected by some increased or decreased refuge visitation. A large percentage of these retail trade establishments in the local communities around NWRs qualify as small businesses (Table 3). We expect that the incremental recreational changes will be scattered, and so we do not expect that the rule will have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities in any region or nationally. As noted previously, we expect approximately $711,000 to be spent in total in the refuges' local economies. The maximum increase would be less than two-tenths of 1 percent for local retail trade spending (Table 3).
The proposed rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. We anticipate no significant employment or small business effects. This rule:
a. Would not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. The minimal impact would be scattered across the country and would most likely not be significant in any local area.
b. Would not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, or local government agencies; or geographic regions. This proposed rule would have only a slight effect on the costs of hunting opportunities for Americans. If the substitute sites are farther from the participants' residences, then an increase in travel costs would occur. The Service does not have information to quantify this change in travel cost but assumes that, since most people travel less than 100 miles to hunt, the increased travel cost would be small. We do not expect this proposed rule to affect the supply or demand for hunting opportunities in the United States, and, therefore, it should not affect prices for hunting equipment and supplies, or the retailers that sell equipment.
c. Would not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This proposed rule represents only a small proportion of recreational spending at NWRs. Therefore, if adopted, this rule would have no measurable economic effect on the wildlife-dependent industry, which has annual sales of equipment and travel expenditures of $72 billion nationwide.
Since this proposed rule would apply to public use of federally owned and managed refuges, it would not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The rule would not have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531
In accordance with E.O. 12630, this proposed rule would not have significant takings implications. This rule would affect only visitors at NWRs and describe what they can do while they are on a refuge.
As discussed in Regulatory Planning and Review and Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, above, this proposed rule would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement under E.O. 13132. In preparing this proposed rule, we worked with State governments.
In accordance with E.O. 12988, the Department of the Interior has determined that this proposed rule would not unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.
On May 18, 2001, the President issued E.O. 13211 on regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and use. E.O. 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking
In accordance with E.O. 13175, we have evaluated possible effects on federally recognized Indian tribes and have determined that there are no effects. We coordinate recreational use on NWRs with Tribal governments having adjoining or overlapping jurisdiction before we propose the regulations.
This rule does not contain any new collections of information that require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
• 1018-0102, “National Wildlife Refuge Special Use Permit Applications and Reports, 50 CFR 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, & 36” (expires August 31, 2020),
• 1018-0140, “Hunting and Fishing Application Forms and Activity Reports for National Wildlife Refuges, 50 CFR 25.41, 25.43, 25.51, 26.32, 26.33, 27.42, 30.11, 31.15, 32.1 to 32.72” (expires May 31, 2018, and in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10, an agency may continue to conduct or sponsor this collection of information while the submission is pending at OMB), and
• 1018-0153, “National Wildlife Refuge Visitor Check-In Permit and Use Report” (expires December 31, 2018).
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
We comply with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531
We analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4332(C)), 43 CFR part 46, and 516 Departmental Manual (DM) 8.
A categorical exclusion from NEPA documentation applies to publication of proposed amendments to refuge-specific hunting and fishing regulations because they are technical and procedural in nature, and the environmental effects are too broad, speculative, or conjectural to lend themselves to meaningful analysis (43 CFR 46.210 and 516 DM 8). Concerning the actions that are the subject of this proposed rulemaking, we have complied with NEPA at the project level when developing each proposal. This is consistent with the Department of the Interior instructions for compliance with NEPA where actions are covered sufficiently by an earlier environmental document (43 CFR 46.120).
Prior to the addition of a refuge to the list of areas open to hunting and fishing in 50 CFR part 32, we develop hunting and fishing plans for the affected refuges. We incorporate these proposed refuge hunting and fishing activities in the refuge comprehensive conservation plan and/or other step-down management plans, pursuant to our refuge planning guidance in 602 Fish and Wildlife Service Manual (FW) 1, 3, and 4. We prepare these comprehensive conservation plans and step-down plans in compliance with section 102(2)(C) of NEPA, the Council on Environmental Quality's regulations for implementing NEPA in 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508, and the Department of Interior's NEPA regulations 43 CFR part 46. We invite the affected public to participate in the review, development, and implementation of these plans. Copies of all plans and NEPA compliance are available from the refuges at the addresses provided below.
Individual refuge headquarters have information about public use programs and conditions that apply to their specific programs and maps of their respective areas. To find out how to contact a specific refuge, contact the appropriate Regional office listed below:
Region 1—Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Eastside Federal Complex, Suite 1692, 911 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232-4181; Telephone (503) 231-6214.
Region 2—Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 1306, 500 Gold Avenue SW, Albuquerque, NM 87103; Telephone (505) 248-6937.
Region 3—Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990, Bloomington, MN 55437-1458; Telephone (612) 713-5360.
Region 4—Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1875 Century Boulevard, Atlanta, GA 30345; Telephone (404) 679-7166.
Region 5—Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035-9589; Telephone (413) 253-8307.
Region 6—Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 134 Union Blvd., Lakewood, CO 80228; Telephone (303) 236-8145.
Region 7—Alaska. Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 E. Tudor Rd., Anchorage, AK 99503; Telephone (907) 786-3545.
Region 8—California and Nevada. Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2606, Sacramento, CA 95825; Telephone (916) 414-6464.
Katherine Harrigan, Division of Natural Resources and Conservation Planning, National Wildlife Refuge System, is the primary author of this rulemaking document.
Fishing, Hunting, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife, Wildlife refuges.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, we propose to amend title 50, chapter I, subchapter C of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 460k, 664, 668dd-668ee, and 715i; Pub. L. 115-20, 131 Stat. 86.
The revisions read as follows:
1. We require refuge hunting permits (signed brochure). The permits are nontransferable, and anyone on refuge land in possession of hunting equipment must possess a signed permit at all times.
2. We prohibit migratory game bird hunting on the refuge during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt.
3. With the exception of hunting for woodcock, we prohibit migratory game bird hunting after 12 p.m. (noon) during the regular State waterfowl hunting season.
4. We allow hunting for woodcock daily throughout the State season.
5. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot shells for hunting while in the field (see § 32.2(k)) in quantities of 25 or fewer. The possession limit includes shells located in or on vehicles and other personal equipment. The field possession limit for shells does not apply to goose hunting during the State Conservation Order.
6. We prohibit hunting closer than 100 yards (90 meters) to another hunter or hunting party.
7. You must remove decoys, blinds, boats, and all other equipment (see § 27.93 of this chapter) daily by 1 p.m.
8. We open the refuge to daylight use only, 30 minutes before legal sunrise to 30 minutes after legal sunset, with the exception that hunters may enter the refuge beginning at 4 a.m. and must exit by 1 hour after legal shooting time ends.
9. Boats with the owner's name and address permanently displayed or displaying valid registration may be left on the refuge from March 1 through October 31. We prohibit the use of boats from 12 a.m. (midnight) to 4 a.m. during duck season.
10. We allow use of dogs for migratory game bird hunting.
11. We prohibit airboats, hovercraft, and personal watercraft (Jet Ski, etc.).
1. Conditions A1, A8, and A11 apply.
2. Hunters may use shotguns only with approved nontoxic shot (see § 32.2(k)) and rifles chambered for rimfire cartridges.
3. We allow squirrel hunting September 1 through February 28, except for season closure of the refuge during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. We allow dogs.
4. We allow rabbit hunting in accordance with the State season, except for season closure of the refuge during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. We allow dogs.
5. We allow quail hunting in accordance with the State season, except for season closure of the refuge during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. We allow dogs.
6. We allow hunting of raccoon and opossum with dogs. We require dogs for hunting raccoon/opossum at night, 30 minutes after legal sunset to 30 minutes before legal sunrise. We list annual season dates in the refuge hunting brochure/permit. We prohibit field trials and organized training events.
7. Hunters may take beaver, muskrat, nutria, armadillo, and coyote during any refuge hunt with those weapons legal during those hunts, subject to applicable State seasons and regulations.
8. We limit nighttime hunting to raccoon/opossum hunting.
1. Conditions A1, A8, and A11 apply.
2. We divide the refuge into two hunting units: Farm Unit and Mingo Creek Unit.
3. The archery/crossbow hunting season for deer begins on the opening day of the State season and continues throughout the State season in the Mingo Creek Unit and Farm Unit except for the season closure of the refuge during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. We provide annual season dates and bag limits in the hunt brochure/permit (signature required).
4. Muzzleloader hunting season for deer will begin in October and continue for a period of up to 9 days in all hunting units with annual season dates and bag limits provided on the hunt brochure/permit.
5. The modern gun hunting season for deer will begin in November and continue for a period of up to 9 days in all hunting units with annual season dates and bag limits provided in the hunt brochure/permit.
6. We prohibit spring and fall gun hunting for turkey.
7. All harvested game must be checked according to State regulations. The Refuge zone to be reported is 002.
8. You may use only shotguns with rifled slugs, muzzleloaders, and legal pistols for modern gun deer hunting on the Farm Unit.
9. We allow only portable deer stands. You may erect stands 7 days prior to the refuge deer season and must remove them from the waterfowl sanctuaries prior to November 15, except for stands used by Quota Gun Deer Hunt permit holders (fee/signature required), which you must remove by the last day of the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. You must remove all stands on the remainder of the refuge within 7 days of the closure of archery season (see § 27.93 of this chapter). We prohibit leaving any tree stand, ground blind, or game camera on the refuge without the owner's name and address clearly written in a conspicuous location.
10. We prohibit the possession or use of buckshot for hunting on all refuge lands.
11. We prohibit hunting from mowed and/or graveled road rights-of-way.
12. Refuge lands are located in State-designated Flood Prone Region B, and
13. We allow only Quota Gun Deer Hunt permit holders on the refuge during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt and only for the purposes of deer hunting. We close the refuge to all other entry and public use during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt.
14. We close waterfowl sanctuaries to all entry and hunting from November 15 to February 28, except for Quota Gun Deer Hunt permit holders who may hunt in the sanctuary when the season overlaps with these dates.
15. You may enter the refuge at 4 a.m. and remain until 1 hour after legal shooting time.
1. Conditions A8 and B8 apply.
2. We close waterfowl sanctuaries to all entry from November 15 to February 28. We also close the refuge to all entry and fishing during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt.
3. We prohibit commercial fishing.
4. We prohibit the take or possession of turtles and/or mollusks (see § 27.21 of this chapter).
5. We prohibit mooring houseboats to the refuge bank on the Little Red River.
1. We require refuge hunt permits. The permits (found on the front cover of the annual hunt brochure/permit—signature required) are nontransferable and anyone on refuge land in possession of hunting equipment must sign and carry the permit at all times.
2. We provide annual season dates for squirrel, rabbit, raccoon, and opossum hunting in the refuge hunting brochure/permit.
3. We allow take of nutria, beaver, and coyote during any refuge hunt with the device allowed for that hunt subject to applicable State seasons and regulations.
4. You may take opossum when hunting raccoon.
5. We require dogs for night hunting of raccoon and opossum. We prohibit field trials and organized training events.
6. When hunting, you may only use shotguns with approved nontoxic shot (see § 32.2(k)) and rifles chambered for rimfire cartridges.
7. We prohibit boats from November 1 through February 28, except on that portion of the refuge open for public fishing with electric motors and Ditch 28.
8. We prohibit hunting from mowed and/or gravel road rights-of-way.
9. We limit nighttime use, 30 minutes after legal sunset to 30 minutes before legal sunrise, to fishing, frogging, and/or raccoon/opossum hunting.
1. Conditions B1, B3, and B6 through B9 apply.
2. We allow archery/crossbow hunting for white-tailed deer. We provide annual season dates in the hunt brochure/permit.
3. Hunters may use only bows or crossbows.
4. Hunters may use only biodegradable materials to mark trails.
5. All harvested game must be checked according to State regulations. The Refuge zone to be reported is 030.
6. We allow only portable deer stands. You may erect stands 7 days prior to the refuge deer season and must remove them 7 days after the closure of archery season (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
7. Hunters may enter the refuge no earlier than 4 a.m. and must leave one hour after legal sunset.
8. We prohibit leaving any tree stand, ground blind, or game camera on the refuge.
1. Condition B7 applies.
2. Anglers may launch boats only in designated areas.
3. We prohibit airboats, personal watercraft, Jet Skis, and hovercraft (see § 27.31 of this chapter).
4. We allow frogging from the beginning of the State frogging season through October 31.
5. We prohibit the take or possession of turtles and/or mollusks (see § 27.21 of this chapter).
1. We require refuge hunting permits. These permits (found on the front cover of the annual hunt brochure/permit—signature required) are nontransferable, and anyone on the refuge in possession of hunting equipment must sign and carry the permit at all times.
2. We prohibit migratory game bird hunting on the refuge during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt.
3. With the exception of hunting for woodcock, we prohibit migratory game bird hunting after 12 p.m. (noon) during the regular State waterfowl hunting season.
4. We allow hunting for woodcock daily throughout the State seasons.
5. You must remove decoys, blinds, boats, and all other equipment (see § 27.93 of this chapter) daily by 1 p.m.
6. Waterfowl hunters may enter the refuge at 4 a.m. and hunt until 12 p.m. (noon).
7. Boats with the owner's name and address permanently displayed or displaying valid registration may be left on the refuge from March 1 through October 31. We prohibit boats on the refuge from 12 a.m. (midnight) to 4 a.m. during duck season.
8. We allow use of dogs for migratory game bird hunting.
9. We allow waterfowl hunting on flooded refuge roads.
10. We close all other hunts during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. We allow only Quota Gun Deer Hunt permit (fee/signature required) holders to enter the refuge during this hunt and only for the purpose of deer hunting.
11. We prohibit airboats, hovercraft, and personal watercraft (Jet Ski, etc.) (see § 27.31 of this chapter).
1. Conditions A1, A10, and A11 apply.
2. We allow squirrel hunting September 1 through February 28, except for refuge-wide season closure during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. We allow dogs.
3. Rabbit season corresponds with the State season, except for refuge-wide season closure during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. We allow dogs.
4. Quail season corresponds with the State season, except for refuge-wide season closure during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. We allow dogs.
5. We allow hunting of raccoon and opossum with dogs. We require dogs for
6. You may take beaver, muskrat, nutria, armadillo, and coyote during any refuge hunt with those weapons legal during those hunts subject to applicable State seasons and regulations.
7. We prohibit hunting from mowed and/or graveled refuge roads except by waterfowl hunters during flooded conditions.
8. You may use only shotguns with approved nontoxic shot (see § 32.2(k)) and rifles chambered for rimfire cartridges when hunting.
9. We limit nighttime use, 30 minutes after legal sunset to 30 minutes before legal sunrise, to fishing, frogging, and/or raccoon/opossum hunting.
1. Conditions A1, A10, A11, B6, B7, and B9 apply.
2. Archery/crossbow hunting season for deer begins on the opening day of the State season and continues throughout the State season, except for refuge-wide season closure during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. We provide annual season dates and bag limits in the refuge hunting brochure/permit.
3. Muzzleloader hunting season for deer will begin in October and will continue for a period of up to 9 days with annual season dates and bag limits provided on the hunt brochure/permit.
4. Modern gun deer hunting will begin in November and continue for a period of up to 11 days with annual season dates and bag limits provided in the refuge hunt brochure/permit.
5. You may take feral hog with weapons legal during those hunts and according to applicable State Wildlife Management Area regulations.
6. The spring gun hunt for turkey will begin on the opening day of the State season and continue throughout the State season on all refuge lands located south of Interstate 40. The remainder of the refuge is closed with the exception of those refuge lands included in the combined Black Swamp Wildlife Management Area/Cache River National Wildlife Refuge quota permit hunts administered by the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission.
7. Hunters may only use shotguns with rifled slugs, muzzleloaders, or legal pistols for modern gun deer hunting on the Dixie Farm Unit Waterfowl Sanctuary, adjacent waterfowl hunt area, and Plunkett Farm Unit Waterfowl Sanctuary.
8. We allow only portable stands. Hunters may erect stands 7 days prior to the refuge deer season and must remove them from the waterfowl sanctuaries prior to November 15, and from the rest of the refuge within 7 days of the closure of archery season (see § 27.93 of this chapter). We prohibit leaving any tree stand, ground blind, or game camera on the refuge without the owner's name and address clearly written in a conspicuous location.
9. We prohibit the possession or use of buckshot for hunting on all refuge lands.
10. We prohibit hunting from mowed and/or graveled road rights-of-way.
11. We will close refuge lands located in State-designated Flood Prone Region B to all deer hunting when the White River gauge at Augusta reaches 31 feet (9.3 meters (m)), as reported by the National Weather Service, and reopen them when the same gauge reading falls below 30 feet (9.1 m) and the White River gauge at Georgetown falls to, or below, 19 feet (5.7 m).
12. We will close refuge lands located in State-designated Flood Prone Region C to all deer hunting when the Cache River gauge at Patterson exceeds 10 feet (3 m), as reported by the National Weather Service, and reopen them when the same gauge reading falls below 8.5 feet (2.6 m).
13. We will close refuge lands located in Flood Prone Region D to all deer and turkey hunting when the White River gauge at Clarendon reaches 28 feet (8.4 m), as reported by the National Weather Service, and reopen them when the same gauge reading falls to, or below, 27 feet (8.1 m).
1. Conditions A10 and B9 apply.
2. We close waterfowl sanctuaries to all entrance and fishing/frogging from November 15 to February 28. We prohibit refuge-wide entry and fishing during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt.
3. We prohibit the take or possession of turtles and/or mollusks (see § 27.21 of this chapter).
4. We prohibit the mooring of houseboats to refuge property.
1. We require all refuge users to sign and possess a refuge user brochure/permit (signature required).
2. We allow duck hunting from legal shooting hours until 12 p.m. (noon).
3. We allow retriever dogs for migratory game bird hunting.
4. You must remove blinds, blind material, and decoys (see § 27.93 of this chapter) from the refuge by 1 p.m. each day.
5. Waterfowl hunters may enter and access the refuge no earlier than 4 a.m.
6. We prohibit boating November 1 through January 31 in the South Unit Waterfowl Hunt Areas, except from 4 a.m. to 1 p.m. on designated waterfowl hunt days.
7. We prohibit waterfowl hunting on Kansas Lake Area (indicated in refuge user brochure/permit).
8. We allow duck hunting on specific scattered tracts of land, in accordance with the North Unit regulations. Consult the refuge office for further information.
9. We only allow all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) for wildlife-dependent hunting and fishing activities. We restrict ATVs to designated yellow-marked trails throughout the refuge, unless marked otherwise. We prohibit the use of ATVs after December 15 each year in designated South Unit areas as shown in refuge user brochure/permit. We define ATVs as an off-road vehicle with factory specifications not to exceed the following: A maximum dry weight of 1,550 pounds (697.5 kilograms), tires having a centerline lug depth of 1 inch (2.5 centimeters) or less and a maximum tire pressure of 15 pounds per square inch (psi) as indicated on the tire by the manufacturer. We allow only those vehicles originally designed by their manufacturer to be ATVs; we prohibit mini trucks or other modified off-road vehicles.
10. We prohibit the use of decoys that contain moving parts or electrical components, except that you may use manually operated ‘jerk strings' to simulate decoy movement.
11. You may not utilize a guide, guide service, outfitter, club, organization, or any other person who provides equipment, services, or assistance on the refuge for compensation.
12. We allow camping only in designated sites and areas identified in the refuge user brochure/permit (signed brochure), and we restrict camping to individuals involved in wildlife-dependent activities. We limit camping on the refuge to no more than 14 days during any 30 consecutive-day period. Campers must occupy camps daily. We prohibit all disturbances, including use of generators, after 10 p.m.
13. We allow refuge users to leave boats 16 feet (4.8 m) or less in length unattended overnight from March 1 to October 31, as long as the owner clearly and prominently displays his or her complete name and physical address.
14. We prohibit all access in the Demonstration and Dry Lake Waterfowl Rest Areas as indicated in the refuge brochure/permit.
15. We prohibit hovercraft, personal watercraft (
1. Condition A1 applies.
2. We allow hunting of rabbit and squirrel on the North Unit from September 1 until January 31.
3. We allow dogs for hunting of rabbit and squirrel from December 1 through January 31 on the North Unit.
4. You may hunt rabbit and squirrel on the South Unit from September 1 until November 30.
5. We prohibit dogs on the South Unit for the purpose of squirrel or rabbit hunting.
6. We close all upland game hunts during quota Gun Deer Hunt and quota Muzzleloader Deer Hunt.
7. We allow furbearer (as defined by State law) hunting in accordance with season dates posted in the refuge user brochure/permit (signed brochure). We allow furbearer hunting only with rimfire weapons and shotguns.
8. We allow the use of dogs for hunting furbearers from legal sunset to legal sunrise. Hunters must tether or pen all dogs used for furbearer hunting from legal sunrise to legal sunset and any time they are not involved in actual hunting.
9. We allow upland game hunting on specific scattered tracts of land, in accordance with Statewide regulations.
1. Condition A1 applies.
2. Archery deer seasons on the North Unit are from the beginning of October until the end of January except during quota muzzleloader and quota gun deer hunts, when the archery season is closed. We provide annual season dates and bag limits in the refuge user brochure/permit (signed brochure).
3. Archery deer seasons on the South Unit are from the beginning of October until the end of December except during quota muzzleloader and quota gun deer hunts, when the archery season is closed. We provide annual season dates and bag limits in the refuge user brochure/permit (signed brochure).
4. Muzzleloader season for deer will begin in October and will continue for a period of up to 3 days of quota hunting and 4 days of non-quota hunting in the North Unit. We provide annual season dates and bag limits in the refuge user brochure/permit (signed brochure).
5. The gun deer hunt will begin in November and will continue for a period of 3 days of quota hunting in the North and South Units, and 2 days of non-quota hunting in the North Unit. We provide annual season dates, bag limits, and areas in the refuge user brochure/permit.
6. We restrict hunt participants for quota hunts to those drawn for a quota permit. The permits are nontransferable and nonrefundable. Hunt dates and application procedures will be available at the refuge office in April.
7. We do not open for the bear season on all refuge-owned lands, including outlying and refuge lands in the Trusten Holder Wildlife Management Area.
8. If you harvest deer or turkey on the refuge, you must immediately record the zone number (Zone 145 for the South Unit or Zone 146 for the North Unit) on your hunting license and later check deer and/or turkey through the State checking system. Outlying tracts use the same zone number as the surrounding State zone.
9. We close the refuge to all non-quota hunting during refuge-wide quota muzzleloader and quota gun deer hunts. 10. You must follow refuge guidance regarding flood-zone closures during the deer hunt. Guidance is found in the refuge brochure, which you must carry at all times.
11. We prohibit the use of dogs other than those specified in the user permit.
12. We prohibit all forms of organized deer drives.
13. We prohibit firearm hunting from or across roads, ATV trails, levees, and maintained utility rights-of-way for deer only.
14. You may only use portable deer stands (see § 27.93 of this chapter). You may erect stands up to 7 days before each hunt, but you must remove them within 7 days after each hunt. All unattended deer stands on the refuge must have the owner's complete name and physical address clearly displayed.
15. We close the Kansas Lake Area to all entry on December 1 and reopen it on March 1.
16. We prohibit the possession of buckshot on the refuge.
17. We prohibit the possession and/or use of toxic shot by hunters using shotguns (see § 32.2(k) of this chapter) when hunting.
18. We provide information on feral hog hunting in the refuge brochure/permit (signed brochure).
1. Condition A1 applies.
2. We allow fishing year-round in LaGrue, Essex, Prairie, Scrubgrass and Brooks Bayous, Big Island Chute, Moon and Belknap Lakes next to Arkansas Highway 1, Indian Bay, the Arkansas Post Canal and adjacent drainage ditches; borrow ditches located adjacent to the west bank of that portion of the White River Levee north of the Graham Burke pumping station; and all refuge-owned North Unit and scattered tract waters. We open all other South Unit refuge waters to sport fishing from March 1 through November 30 unless posted otherwise.
3. We allow frogging on all refuge-owned waters open for sport fishing as follows: We allow frogging on the South Unit from the beginning of the State season through November 30; we allow frogging on the North Unit for the entire State season.
4. We prohibit all commercial and recreational harvest of turtle on all property administered by Dale Bumpers White River National Wildlife Refuge.
5. We prohibit take or possession of any freshwater mussel, and we do not open to mussel shelling.
1. We allow hunting of duck, goose, and coot during the State waterfowl season except during scheduled quota refuge Gun Deer Hunts.
2. Hunting of duck, goose, and coot ends at 12 p.m. (noon) each day.
3. We allow only portable blinds. You must remove all duck hunting equipment (portable blinds, boats, guns, and decoys) (see § 27.93 of this chapter) from the hunt area by 1:30 p.m. each day.
4. We close areas of the refuge posted with “Area Closed” signs and identify them on the refuge hunt brochure map as a waterfowl sanctuary. Waterfowl sanctuaries are closed to all public entry and public use during waterfowl hunting season.
5. Hunters must possess and carry a signed Refuge Public Use Regulations Brochure/Access Permit (signed brochure) while hunting.
6. We prohibit possession and/or use of herbicides (see § 27.51 of this chapter).
7. All youth hunters age 15 and younger must remain within sight and normal voice contact of an adult age 21 or older, possessing a valid hunting license. One adult may supervise no more than two youth hunters.
8. We allow only all-terrain vehicles/utility-type vehicles (ATVs/UTVs) for hunting and fishing activities. We restrict ATVs/UTVs to designated times and designated trails (see § 27.31 of this chapter) marked with signs and paint. We identify these trails and the dates they are open for use in the refuge hunt brochure. We limit ATVs/UTVs to those having an engine displacement size not exceeding 700cc. We limit ATV/UTV tires to those having a centerline lug depth not exceeding 1 inch (2.5 centimeters). You may use horses on roads and ATV/UTV trails (when open to motor vehicle and ATV/UTV traffic, respectively) as a mode of transportation for hunting and fishing activities on the refuge.
9. We prohibit hunting within 150 feet (45 meters (m)) of roads and trails open to motor vehicle use (including ATV/UTV trails).
10. We allow camping only at designated primitive campground sites identified in the refuge hunt brochure, and we restrict camping to individuals involved in wildlife-dependent refuge activities. Campers may stay no more than 14 days during any 30 consecutive-day period in any campground and must occupy camps daily. We prohibit all disturbances, including use of generators, after 10 p.m. You must unload all hunting weapons (see § 27.42(b) of this chapter) within 100 yards (90 m) of a campground.
11. You may take beaver, nutria, and coyote during any daytime refuge hunt with weapons and ammunition allowed for that hunt. There is no bag limit.
12. We allow the use of retriever dogs.
13. We prohibit the use or possession of any electronic call or other electronic device used for producing or projecting vocal sounds of any wildlife species.
14. We prohibit leaving any boat on the refuge.
1. Conditions A4 through A10, and A12 apply.
2. We allow hunting for quail, squirrel, rabbit, and furbearers (as defined by State law) on the refuge during State seasons through January 31. We list specific hunting season dates annually in the refuge hunt brochure. We close upland game hunting during refuge quota deer hunts. We annually publish dates for these quota deer hunts in the refuge hunt brochure.
3. We do not open for spring squirrel hunting season, summer/early fall raccoon hunting season, or spring bobcat hunting season.
4. We prohibit possession of lead ammunition except that you may possess rimfire rifle lead ammunition no larger than .22 caliber for upland game hunting. We prohibit possession of shot larger than that legal for waterfowl hunting. During the deer and turkey hunts, hunters may possess lead ammunition legal for taking deer and turkey. We prohibit buckshot for gun deer hunting.
5. You may use dogs for squirrel and rabbit hunting from December 1 through January 31. You may also use dogs for quail hunting and for raccoon/opossum hunting during open season on the refuge for these species.
1. Conditions A5 through A10 apply.
2. We allow archery deer hunting on the refuge from the opening of the State season through January 31.
3. We close archery deer hunting during the quota gun deer hunts.
4. The refuge will conduct no more than two muzzleloader deer hunts and no more than four quota modern gun deer hunts.
5. We allow muzzleloader deer hunting during the October State Muzzleloader season for this deer management zone. The refuge will conduct one 4-day quota modern gun hunt for deer, typically in November. The refuge also may conduct one mobility-impaired hunt for deer typically in early November.
6. Total deer harvested refuge-wide is two deer (two does or one buck and one doe as defined by State law) regardless of method. See refuge brochure for specific bag limit information.
7. Hunters must check all harvested deer during quota hunts at refuge deer check stations on the same day of the kill. We identify the check station locations in the refuge hunt brochure. Carcasses of deer taken must remain intact (except you may field dress) until checked.
8. You may only use portable deer stands erected no earlier than the opening day of Archery Season and you must remove them no later than January 31 each year (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
9. We prohibit the use of deer decoy(s).
10. We prohibit horses and mules during refuge quota deer hunts.
11. We open spring archery turkey hunting during the State spring turkey season. We do not open for fall archery turkey season.
12. We close spring archery turkey hunting during scheduled turkey quota gun hunts.
13. The refuge will conduct no more than three quota permit spring turkey gun hunts and no more than two 3-day quota spring turkey hunts (typically in April). Specific hunt dates and application procedures will be available at the refuge office in January. We restrict hunt participants to those selected for a quota permit, except that one nonhunting adult age 21 or older possessing a valid hunting license must accompany the youth hunter age 15 and younger.
14. An adult age 21 or older possessing a valid hunting license must accompany and be within sight and normal voice contact of hunters age 15 and younger. One adult may supervise no more than one youth hunter.
15. We prohibit leaving any tree stand, ground blind, or game camera on the refuge without the owner's name and address clearly written in a conspicuous location. Game cameras must be removed from the refuge daily and are prohibited from being left overnight.
16. We restrict hunt participants for quota hunts to those drawn for a quota permit (Quota Deer Hunt Application, FWS Form 3-2354). These permits are nontransferable and permit fees are nonrefundable. If conditions prevent the hunts from taking place, there will be no refunds or permits carried over from year to year. Hunt dates and application procedures will be available at the refuge office in July for deer and January for turkey.
17. The incidental taking of feral hogs will be in accordance with Arkansas Game and Fish Commission regulations concerning the taking of feral hogs on State WMAs. If allowed on State WMAs, feral hogs may be taken incidental to daytime refuge hunts (without the use of dogs) with legal hunting equipment and ammunition allowed for that hunt. No bag limit. Live hogs may not be transported or possessed.
1. Conditions A5, A6, A7, A10, and A14 apply.
2. We prohibit fishing in the waterfowl sanctuary area when the sanctuary is closed, with the exception of the main channel of the Ouachita and Saline Rivers and the borrow pits along Highway 82. We post the waterfowl sanctuary area with “Area Closed” signs and identify those areas in refuge hunt brochures.
3. We allow fishing only in areas accessible from the Ouachita and Saline Rivers and Eagle, Jones, and Pereogeethe Lakes during the refuge quota gun hunts.
4. You must reset trotlines when receding water levels expose them.
1. We require refuge hunting permits (found on the front cover of the annual hunt brochure/permit—signature required). The permits are nontransferable, and anyone on refuge land in possession of hunting equipment must sign and carry the permits at all times. Your hunt permit will also act as your entrance pass to the refuge.
2. During the refuge archery season, you may take only squirrel, rabbit, raccoon, opossum, beaver, armadillo, coyote, or bobcat.
3. We allow gun hunting of raccoon and opossum with dogs every Thursday, Friday, and Saturday until legal sunrise during the month of February. We prohibit field trials and organized training events (see § 26.21(b) of this chapter).
4. We only allow all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) for hunters and anglers with disabilities. We require a refuge ATV permit (Special Use Permit; FWS Form 3-1383-G) issued by the refuge manager.
5. We prohibit hunting from a vehicle.
6. You must enter and exit the refuge from designated roads and parking areas. We prohibit accessing refuge waters and land from the Arkansas River. We prohibit boating over the dam at the Old River Channel from either direction.
7. We prohibit hunting within 100 feet (30 meters) of roads open to motor vehicle use and nature trails.
8. We allow the use of nonmotorized boats during the refuge fishing/boating season (March 1 to October 31), but we prohibit hunters leaving boats on the refuge overnight (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
1. Conditions B1 and B4 through B8 apply.
2. We allow archery/crossbow hunting for white-tailed deer and turkey. We provide annual season dates in the public use regulations brochure/permit (signature required).
3. The refuge will conduct one youth-only (between ages 6 and 15 at the beginning of the gun deer season in Zone 7) quota gun deer hunt. Specific hunt dates and application procedures will be available at the refuge office in July. We restrict hunt participants to those selected for a quota permit, except that one nonhunting adult must accompany the youth hunter during the youth hunt.
4. We open spring archery turkey hunting during the State turkey season.
5. We close the refuge to all entry and public use during scheduled youth quota gun hunts, except for those allowed to participate in the youth quota gun hunt.
6. The refuge will conduct two youth-only (age 6 to 15 at the beginning of the spring turkey season) quota spring gun turkey hunts, each 2 days in length. Specific hunt dates and application procedures will be available at the refuge office in January. We restrict hunt participants to those selected for a quota permit (name, address, phone number required), except that one nonhunting adult age 21 or older must accompany the youth hunter during the youth hunt.
7. We allow only portable deer stands. You may erect stands 7 days before the start of the season and must remove the stands from the refuge within 7 days after the season ends (see §§ 27.93 and 27.94 of this chapter).
8. You must permanently affix the owner's name, address, and phone number to all tree stands, ground blinds, or game cameras on the refuge.
9. We prohibit hunting from paved, graveled, and mowed roads and mowed trails (see § 27.31 of this chapter).
10. We prohibit all forms of organized game drives.
11. You must check all game at the refuge check station.
1. Conditions B4, B6, and C5 apply.
2. Waters of the refuge are only open for fishing March 1 through October 31 from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
3. We prohibit anglers from leaving their boats unattended overnight on any portion of the refuge (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
4. We prohibit the take and possession of turtles and/or mollusks (see § 27.21 of this chapter).
5. We prohibit airboats, hovercraft, and personal watercraft (Jet Skis, etc.) (see § 27.31 of this chapter).
1. You must possess and carry a Refuge Public Use Regulations Brochure/Access Permit (signed brochure) while hunting.
2. Hunting of duck, goose, and coot ends at 12 p.m. (noon) each day.
3. We allow only portable blinds. Hunters must remove portable blinds, boats, and decoys from the hunt area by 1:30 p.m. each day (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
4. You may only possess shotshells in quantities of 25 or fewer per day during waterfowl hunting season; hunters may not discharge more than 25 shells per day.
5. Hunters under age 16 do not need to have a hunter education card if they are under the direct supervision (within arm's reach) of a holder of a valid hunting license who is at least age 21.
6. All youth hunters age 15 and younger must remain within sight and normal voice contact of an adult age 21 or older, possessing a valid hunting license. One adult may supervise no more than two youth hunters.
7. We allow only all-terrain vehicles/utility-type vehicles (ATVs/UTVs) for hunting activities. We restrict ATVs/UTVs to designated times and designated trails (see § 27.31 of this chapter) marked with signs and paint. We identify those trails and the dates that they are open for use in the refuge hunt brochure. We limit ATVs/UTVs to those having an engine displacement size not exceeding 700cc. We limit ATV/UTV tires to those having a centerline lug depth not exceeding 1 inch (2.5 centimeters). You may use horses on roads and ATV/UTV trails (when open to motor vehicle and ATV/UTV traffic respectively) as a mode of transportation for hunting activities on the refuge.
8. We prohibit hunting within 150 feet (45 meters) of roads and trails open
9. You may take beaver, nutria, and coyote during any daytime refuge hunt with weapons and ammunition legal for that hunt. There is no bag limit. We prohibit transportation or possession of live hog.
10. All boats are prohibited on the refuge between the hours of 1:30 p.m. and 4 a.m. during waterfowl season.
11. All boat motors (including surface drive motors, mud motors, etc.) larger than 25 horsepower (HP) are prohibited.
12. Hunters may not enter the refuge until 4 a.m., with the exception of designated parking areas. Hunting ends at 12 p.m. (noon) each day.
1. Conditions A4 through A9, and A11 apply.
2. We allow hunting during State seasons (see State regulations for the appropriate zone) for quail, squirrel, rabbit, and furbearers (as defined by State law) through January 31. We list specific hunting season dates annually in the refuge hunt brochure.
3. We do not open for the spring squirrel hunting season, summer/fall raccoon hunting season, or the spring bobcat hunting season.
4. When upland game hunting, we prohibit possession of lead ammunition except that you may possess rimfire rifle lead ammunition no larger than .22 caliber. We prohibit possession of shot larger than that legal for waterfowl hunting.
5. You may use dogs for squirrel and rabbit hunting from December 1 through January 31. You may also use dogs for quail hunting and for raccoon/opossum hunting during open season on the refuge for these species.
6. We allow nighttime raccoon and opossum hunting.
1. Conditions A5 through A9, and A11 apply.
2. We allow muzzleloader deer hunting during the first State muzzleloader season for this zone (see State regulations for appropriate zone).
3. We prohibit buckshot for gun deer hunting.
4. Bag limit for the muzzleloader deer hunt is two deer, with no more than one buck.
5. You may only use portable deer stands erected no earlier than the opening day of Archery Season and you must remove them no later than January 31 each year (see § 27.93 of this chapter). Limit is one deer stand, blind, etc., per person.
6. We prohibit the use of deer decoy(s).
7. The refuge will conduct no more than one quota permit youth spring turkey gun hunt. Specific hunt dates and application procedures will be available at the refuge office in January. We restrict hunt participants on these hunts to those selected for a quota permit, except that one nonhunting adult age 21 or older and possessing a valid hunting license must accompany a youth hunter age 15 or younger.
8. An adult age 21 or older possessing a valid hunting license must accompany and be within sight or normal voice contact of hunters age 15 and younger. One adult may supervise no more than one youth hunter.
9. The incidental taking of feral hogs will be in accordance with Arkansas Game and Fish Commission regulations concerning the taking of feral hogs on State WMAs. If allowed on State WMAs, feral hogs may be taken incidental to daytime refuge hunts (without the use of dogs) with legal hunting equipment and ammunition allowed for that hunt. No bag limit. Live hogs may not be transported or possessed.
1. We require refuge hunting permits. The permits (found on the front cover of the annual hunt brochure/permit—signature required) are nontransferable and anyone on refuge land in possession of hunting equipment must sign and carry them at all times.
2. We provide annual season dates on the hunt brochure/permit.
3. Hunters may enter the refuge at 4 a.m. and must leave the refuge by legal sunset.
4. Roundpond and Pigmon Units are closed to all migratory bird hunting.
1. Conditions A1 through A4 apply.
2. You may use only shotguns with approved nontoxic shot (see § 32.2(k)) and rifles chambered for rimfire cartridges when hunting.
3. We provide annual season dates for squirrel, rabbit, raccoon, and opossum hunting on the hunt brochure/permit. We allow dogs.
4. You may take nutria, beaver, and coyote during any refuge hunt with those weapons legal during those hunts, subject to applicable State seasons and regulations.
5. You may take feral hog only during the refuge Quota Gun Deer Hunt and according to State WMA regulations.
6. We limit nighttime hunting to raccoon/opossum hunting.
7. We close all other hunts during the Quota Gun Deer Hunt. We allow only Quota Gun Deer Hunt permit (fee/signature required) holders to enter the refuge during this hunt and only for deer hunting.
1. Conditions A1 through A4, and B4 through B7 apply.
2. We prohibit hunting from mowed and/or graveled road rights-of-way.
3. We specify annual season dates, bag limits, and hunting methods on the annual hunting brochure/permit.
4. We allow only portable deer stands. You may erect stands 7 days prior to the refuge deer season and must remove them from the waterfowl sanctuaries by December 1. You must remove all stands on the remainder of the refuge within 7 days of the closure of archery season (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
5. We prohibit the possession or use of buckshot for hunting on all refuge lands.
6. We prohibit leaving any tree stand, ground blind, or game camera on the refuge without the owner's name, address, and phone number clearly written in a conspicuous location.
1. We allow fishing from March 1 through October 31 from
2. We prohibit the possession or use of live carp, shad, buffalo, or goldfish for bait.
3. We prohibit the possession or use of yo-yos, jugs, or other floating containers; drops or limb lines; trotlines; and commercial fishing tackle.
4. We allow bank fishing.
5. We prohibit the take or possession of frogs, mollusks, and/or turtles (see § 27.21 of this chapter).
6. Anglers may launch boats only in designated areas.
7. Anglers must remove all boats daily from the refuge (see § 27.93 of this chapter). We prohibit airboats, personal watercraft, and hovercraft.
The revisions read as follows:
1. Hunters assigned to the spaced blind unit must remain within 100 feet (30.5 meters) of the numbered steel post (blind site) except when pursuing cripples, placing decoys, or traveling to and from the parking area.
2. Hunters may not possess more than 25 shells while in the field.
3. We allow only nonmotorized boats.
1. In the controlled waterfowl hunting area, we require a valid Refuge Recreation Pass for all hunters age 16 or older. An adult with a valid Recreation Pass must accompany hunters age 17 and younger who are hunting in the controlled area.
2. We require advance reservations for the first 2 days of the hunting season. Reservations are obtained through the Waterfowl Lottery each year.
3. Entry hours begin at 4:30 a.m. unless otherwise posted.
4. Shooting hours end at 1 p.m. on all California portions of the refuge with the following exceptions:
i. The refuge manager may designate up to 6 afternoon special youth, ladies, veteran, or disabled hunter waterfowl hunts per season.
ii. The refuge manager may designate up to 3 days per week of afternoon waterfowl hunting for the general public after December 1.
5. You may not set decoys in retrieving zones.
6. We prohibit air-thrust and inboard water-thrust boats.
7. You may use only nonmotorized boats and boats with electric motors on designated motorless units from the start of the hunting season through November 30. You may use motorized boats on designated motorless units from December 1 through the end of hunting season.
8. Pit style hunting blinds located in the Stearns units and unit 9D are first-come, first-served. We require you to hunt within a 200-foot (61-meter) radius of the blind.
1. You may possess only 25 or fewer shotshells per day after leaving the parking lot.
2. Each hunter must remain inside his or her assigned blind, except for placing decoys, retrieving downed birds, and traveling to and from the parking area. We prohibit shooting from outside the blind.
3. We restrict hunters in the spaced zone area of the Lonetree Unit to their assigned zone except when they are traveling to and from the parking area, retrieving downed birds, or shooting to retrieve crippled birds.
4. Dogs must remain under the immediate control of their owners at all times (see § 26.21(b) of this chapter).
1. Access to the hunt area on all units open to public hunting is by boat only, except on designated units, which are accessible by foot traffic or boat. We prohibit bicycles or other conveyances. Mobility-impaired hunters should consult with the refuge manager for allowed conveyances. We prohibit waterfowl hunting on the Mooney and Codora Units.
2. On the Codora Unit, we prohibit hunting except for junior hunters on weekends only. Junior hunters must possess a valid junior hunting license and be accompanied by a nonhunting adult.
3. We allow only shotgun hunting.
4. We prohibit hunting within 50 feet (15 meters (m)) of any landward boundary adjacent to private property.
5. We prohibit hunting within 150 yards (45 m) of any occupied dwelling, house, residence, or other building or any barn or other outbuilding used in connection therewith.
6. We prohibit fires on the refuge, except we allow portable gas stoves on gravel bars (see § 27.95(a) of this chapter).
7. We open the refuge for day-use access from 2 hours before legal sunrise until 1
8. We require dogs to be kept on a leash, except for hunting dogs engaged in authorized hunting activities, and under the immediate control of a licensed hunter (see § 26.21(b) of this chapter).
1. We allow only shotgun and archery hunting.
2. Conditions A1, A2, and A4 through A8 apply.
1. Conditions A1, A2, A4 through A8, and B1 apply.
2. Feral hogs may be hunted September 1 through March 15.
3. We prohibit the use of dogs while hunting black-tailed deer and feral hogs.
4. We allow the use of only shotguns not capable of holding more than three rounds and firing single non-lead shotgun slugs, and archery equipment. We prohibit the use or possession of rifles and pistols on the refuge for hunting.
1. Conditions A6 through A8 apply.
2. On Packer Lake and Drumheller North, due to primitive access, we only allow boats up to 14 feet (4.2 m) and canoes. Electric motors only.
1. You may only hunt snipe within the free-roaming portion of the San Luis Unit waterfowl hunting area.
2. You may only possess shotshells in quantities of 25 or fewer after leaving your assigned parking lot or boat launch.
3. We prohibit dropping of passengers or equipment, and stopping between designated parking areas. You must return your permits to the check stations immediately upon completion of your hunt and prior to using any tour routes or leaving the refuge vicinity.
4. We restrict hunters in the spaced blind area to their assigned blind except when they are placing decoys, traveling to and from the parking area, retrieving downed birds, or pursuing cripples.
5. We restrict hunters in the spaced zone area of the East Bear Creek Unit to their assigned zone except when they are traveling to and from the parking area, retrieving downed birds, or pursuing crippled birds.
6. Access to the Freitas Unit free-roam hunting area is by boat only with a maximum of 5 miles per hour (mph). Prohibited boats include air-thrust and/or inboard water-thrust types.
7. We prohibit the use of motorized boats in the free-roam units with the exception of the Freitas Unit.
8. We do not allow vehicle trailers of any type or size to be in the refuge hunt areas at any time or to be left unattended at any location on the refuge.
9. Dogs must remain under the immediate control of their owners at all times (see § 26.21(b) of this chapter).
1. You may only possess shotshells in quantities of 25 or fewer while in the field.
2. Dogs must remain under the immediate control of their owners at all times (see § 26.21(b) of this chapter).
1. We only allow fishing during normal refuge visitation hours in designated areas as posted.
2. We only allow the use of pole and line or rod and reel to take fish, and anglers must attend their equipment at all times.
1. We only allow hunting in the open waters of San Pablo Bay and navigable sloughs, the Cullinan Ranch Unit, and the Sears Point Dickson Ranch Unit.
2. You may only hunt from a boat. We prohibit walk-in hunting on the refuge.
3. You may possess shotshells only in quantities of 25 or fewer while in the field.
4. We only allow dogs engaged in hunting activities on the refuge during waterfowl season. We prohibit other domesticated animals or pets.
5. We allow foot access through the refuge to the State's Tolay Creek Unit (Midshipman Slough) for waterfowl hunting.
6. We allow waterfowl hunting from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
7. Hunters may enter closed areas of the refuge (tidal marshes) only to retrieve downed birds, but all weapons must be left in the designated hunting areas.
8. We prohibit launching of boats and access to the Bay or sloughs from refuge property except from designated boat launch sites (Cullinan Ranch Unit and Dickson Ranch Unit).
1. You may only hunt on Wednesdays, Saturdays, and Sundays.
2. You may only possess approved nontoxic shotshells (see § 32.2(k)) in quantities of 25 or fewer while in the field.
3. You may only access the Tolay Creek Unit by foot or bicycle.
4. We only allow dogs engaged in hunting activities on the refuge during pheasant season. We prohibit other domesticated animals or pets.
1. The refuge is only open to fishing from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
2. We only allow fishing in the open waters of San Pablo Bay and navigable sloughs, the Cullinan Ranch Unit, and the Dickson Ranch Unit.
3. We prohibit walking through or over marsh vegetation.
4. We prohibit launching of boats and access to the Bay or sloughs from refuge property except from designated boat launch sites. We allow only nonmotorized crafts at the Cullinan Ranch Unit and Dickson Ranch Unit launch sites.
5. We only allow fishing from the shore at designated areas along the west side of Cullinan Ranch Unit in addition to the fishing and wildlife observation pier and canoe/kayak dock.
6. We allow fishing only with a pole and line or rod and reel. We prohibit bow fishing and gigging.
1. In the controlled waterfowl hunting area, we require a valid Refuge Recreation Pass for all hunters age 16 or older. An adult with a valid Recreation Pass must accompany hunters age 17 or younger who are hunting in the controlled area.
2. We require advance reservations for the first 2 days of the hunting season. You may obtain a reservation through the Waterfowl Lottery each year.
3. Entry hours begin at 4:30 a.m. unless otherwise posted.
4. Shooting hours end at 1 p.m. on all portions of the refuge with the following exceptions:
i. The refuge manager may designate up to 6 afternoon special youth, ladies, veteran, or disabled hunter waterfowl hunts per season.
ii. The refuge manager may designate up to 3 days per week of afternoon
5. You select blind sites by lottery at the beginning of each hunt day. You may shoot only from within your assigned blind site.
6. We prohibit the setting of decoys in retrieving zones.
7. We prohibit air-thrust and inboard water-thrust boats.
8. We prohibit the use of all-terrain amphibious or utility-type vehicles (UTVs) in wetland units.
The revisions read as follows:
1. All migratory bird hunting closes annually on December 31.
2. We allow access to the refuge one hour prior to legal shooting time.
3. We allow use of only portable stands and blinds that the hunter must remove following each day's hunt (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
4. We prohibit hunting 200 feet (60 meters) from any public use road, designated parking area, or designated public use facility located within the hunt area.
1. All upland game hunting closes annually on December 31.
2. Condition A2 applies.
1. Conditions A2 and A3 apply.
2. Elk hunters:
i. Must possess a refuge-specific permit to hunt elk; and
ii. Must attend a scheduled pre-hunt information meeting prior to hunting.
1. We prohibit fishing between June 1 and July 31 each year.
2. We allow fishing only from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
3. We prohibit ice fishing on the refuge.
4. Fishing is closed in Unit C when the refuge is open to big game rifle hunting.
5. We prohibit lead sinkers and live bait for fishing.
1. We allow Eurasian collared-dove hunting only during the mourning dove season.
2. The only acceptable methods of take are shotguns, hand-held bows, and hawking/falconry.
1. We allow Eurasian collared-dove hunting only during the mourning dove season.
2. The only acceptable methods of take are shotguns, hand-held bows, and hawking/falconry.
The revisions read as follows:
1. Refuge permits are required for waterfowl hunting except in “walk-in” areas as defined in the refuge brochure. You must obtain and possess a refuge permit from the refuge office or website.
2. You must complete and return a Migratory Bird Hunt Report (FWS Form 3-2361), available at the refuge administration office or on the refuge's website, within 15 days of the close of the season.
3. You may access the Lottery Waterfowl hunt area by boat. The maximum horsepower allowed for boat motors is 30 horsepower (HP). You must abide by the slow, no-wake zones on designated portions of refuge waterways as depicted in maps or within the brochure.
4. Disabled Waterfowl Draw Area
i. All disabled hunters must possess and carry a State of Delaware Certified Hunter with Disabilities Card while hunting in disabled areas. We will not accept photocopies or electronic copies of these forms.
ii. Disabled hunters may have a nonhunting assistant who is age 18 or older. The assistant must remain within sight and normal voice contact, must not be engaged in hunting, and must possess a valid refuge hunt brochure signed in ink and a valid government-issued photo identification. Any assistant engaged in hunting must possess and carry all pertinent State and Federal licenses and stamps.
iii. We do not allow assistants to enter a designated disabled hunting area unless they are accompanied by a certified disabled hunter.
1. We do not allow squirrel hunting due to the similarity of gray squirrels and the State endangered Delmarva fox squirrel.
2. You must obtain and possess a refuge permit from the refuge office or website.
1. We prohibit organized deer drives.
2. Hunting on the headquarters deer hunt area will be by lottery. You must obtain and possess a refuge permit from the refuge office or website.
1. Turkle and Fleetwood ponds are restricted to electric trolling motors only.
2. All crabbing and fishing gear must be attended at all times. No gear may be left overnight.
The revisions read as follows:
1. You must possess and carry a signed refuge waterfowl hunt permit (signed brochure) while hunting. These brochures are available at the refuge visitor center and on the refuge's website (
2. We allow hunting in the interior of the refuge south of latitude line 26.27.130 and north of mile markers 12 and 14 (SEE PERMIT MAP). We prohibit hunting from canals or levees and those areas posted as closed.
3. We do not open to hunting on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Christmas Day.
4. We allow hunting on the refuge from
5. Hunters may only enter and leave the refuge at the Headquarters Area (Boynton Beach) and the Hillsboro Area (Boca Raton).
6. We allow only temporary blinds of native vegetation.
7. Hunters must remove decoys and other personal property (see § 27.93 of this chapter) from the hunting area at the end of each hunt day.
8. Hunters must complete a Migratory Bird Hunt Report (FWS Form 3-2361) and place it in an entrance fee canister each day prior to exiting the refuge.
9. All youth hunters age 15 and younger must be supervised by a licensed and permitted adult age 21 or older, and must remain with the adult while hunting. Youth hunters must have completed a hunter education course.
10. We allow only boats equipped with factory-manufactured-water-cooled outboard motors, boats with electric motors, and nonmotorized boats. We prohibit boats with air-cooled engines, airboats, fan boats, hovercraft, and
11. There is a 35 mph speed limit in all waters of the refuge. A 500-foot (150-meter) Idle Speed Zone is at each of the refuge's three boat ramps.
12. We require all boats operating outside of the main perimeter canals (the L-40 Canal, L-39 Canal, L-7 Canal, and L-101 Canal) in interior areas of the refuge and within the hunt area to fly a 12-inch by 12-inch (30-cm by 30-cm) orange flag 10 feet (3 m) above the vessel's waterline.
1. You must possess and carry a signed refuge alligator hunt permit (signed brochure) while hunting. These brochures are available at the refuge visitor center and on the refuge's website (
2. We allow hunting in the interior of the refuge south of latitude line 26.27.130 and north of mile markers 12 and 14, including the canals south of that line (SEE PERMIT MAP). We prohibit hunting from levees and those areas posted as closed.
3. We allow hunting on the refuge 1 hour before sunset on Friday night through 1 hour after sunrise Saturday morning, and 1 hour before sunset on Saturday night through 1 hour after sunrise Sunday morning. We allow alligator hunting the first 2 weekends during Harvest Period 1 (August) and the first 2 weekends during Harvest Period 2 (September). Following the close of Harvest Period 2, the remaining weekends in October will be open for alligator harvest permittees who possess unused CITES tags. Specific dates for the alligator hunt will be provided on the harvest permit.
4. Hunters age 18 and older must be in possession of all necessary State and Federal licenses, permits, and CITES tags, as well as a refuge hunt permit (signed hunt brochure) while hunting on the refuge. They must possess an Alligator Trapping License with CITES tags or an Alligator Trapping Agent License, if applicable.
5. Hunters age 17 and younger may not hunt, but may only accompany an adult age 21 or older who possesses an Alligator Trapping Agent License.
6. Hunters may only enter and leave the refuge at the Hillsboro Area (Loxahatchee Road, Boca Raton).
7. You may take alligators using hand-held snares, harpoons, gigs, snatch hooks, artificial lures, manually operated spears, spear guns, and crossbows. We prohibit the taking of alligators using baited hooks, baited wooden pegs, or firearms. We allow the use of bang sticks (a hand-held pole with a pistol or shotgun cartridge on the end in a very short barrel) with nontoxic ammunition only for taking alligators attached to a restraining line (see § 32.2(k)). Once an alligator is captured, it must be killed immediately. We prohibit catch and release of alligators. Once the alligator is dead, you must lock a CITES tag through the skin of the carcass within 6 inches (15.2 centimeters) of the tip of the tail. The tag must remain attached to the alligator at all times.
8. Hunters must remove all personal property (see § 27.93 of this chapter) from the hunting area at the end of each hunt day.
9. We allow only one vessel per hunting group or party.
10. Conditions A9 and A10 apply.
1. We allow fishing south of a line of latitude of 26.27.130 and in the rim canal in the rest of the refuge. We prohibit fishing in those areas posted as closed to fishing or to the public.
2. We only allow the use of rods and reels and poles and lines, and anglers must attend them at all times.
3. We prohibit commercial fishing and the taking of frogs, turtles, and other wildlife (see § 27.21 of this chapter).
4. We allow 12 fishing tournaments a year by Special Use Permit only (General Activities—Special Use Permit Application, FWS Form 3-1383-G). Contact the Refuge Office at 561-735-6029 for more information.
5. We prohibit the possession or use of cast nets, seines, trot lines, jugs, gigs, and other fishing devices.
6. Anglers may only launch boats at the Headquarters Area (Boynton Beach), the Hillsboro Area (Boca Raton), and 20 Mile Bend (West Palm Beach).
7. Conditions A9 and A10 apply.
1. We allow the take of crabs with the use of dip nets only.
6. We allow launching of canoes and kayaks anywhere on the right (north) side of Wildlife Drive. We prohibit launching motorized vessels over 14 feet (4.2 meters) in length from Wildlife Drive. Motorized vessels less than 14 feet (4.2 meters) in length may only be launched from designated site #2.
10. We prohibit the use of cast nets from the left (south) side of Wildlife Drive or any water control structure, bridge, boardwalk, or rip rap affixed to Wildlife Drive.
11. All fish must remain in whole condition until removed from refuge lands and waters.
13. We prohibit airboats, hovercraft, personal watercraft, and “Go-Devil”-style outboard motors.
1. We require a valid Lake Woodruff Quota Hunt Permit, which can be purchased through Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission; and a valid Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge hunt permit (signed annual hunt brochure), which is free and nontransferable.
2. All hunters must be on stands or in blinds during deer hunts.
5. You may set up stands or blinds 2 days prior to the hunt for which you are permitted, and you must remove them on or before the last day of your permitted hunt. You must clearly mark stands with the hunter's name and address or the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) permit number found on your hunting license. No more than one stand or blind per person may be on the refuge at any time, unless a permitted hunter is accompanied by a youth hunter. Stands and/or blinds for youth hunters must be placed within sight and normal voice contact of the permitted hunter's stand and marked with the adult permitted hunter's name and address or the FWC permit number and the word “YOUTH.”
6. If you use flagging or other trail marking material, you must print your name or FWC permit number on each piece or marker. You may set up flagging and trail markers 2 days prior to the permitted hunt, and you must
8. The Western Unit is only accessible by boat.
12. We prohibit shotgun loads larger than number two shot and slugs during turkey hunts.
The revisions read as follows:
12. Youth hunters age 15 and younger must remain within sight and normal voice contact of an adult age 21 or older. One adult may supervise no more than one youth hunter.
12. Youth hunters age 15 and younger must remain within sight and normal voice contact of an adult age 21 or older. One adult may supervise no more than one youth hunter.
1. We only allow foot and bicycle traffic on the refuge portion of Cowhouse Island.
2. We only allow dogs to locate, point, and retrieve during quail hunts.
3. Feral hogs can only be taken during small game dates after October 31.
1. In the Pocket Unit:
i. We only allow archery hunting and foot traffic.
ii. You must sign in and out daily.
iii. We prohibit possessing a cocked crossbow in a motor vehicle.
iv. We allow nonmotorized scouting 7 days prior to scheduled hunt.
2. In the Suwannee Canal Unit:
i. We only allow two half-day hunts reserved for 30 hunters and 10 mobility-impaired/youth hunters.
ii. We allow only shotguns with slugs or muzzleloaders.
iii. We require a refuge permit (Big/Upland Game Hunt Application, FWS Form 3-2356) obtained through refuge lottery.
iv. You must sign in and sign out daily.
v. You must tag your deer with special refuge tags.
vi. There is a limit of two deer of either sex per day.
vii. We zone Chesser Island Hunt area to accommodate mobility-impaired and youth hunters. Only mobility-impaired hunters may use ATVs and vehicles on firebreaks and unpaved roads.
viii. We allow nonmotorized scouting 7 days prior to scheduled hunt.
ix. Condition C.1.iii applies.
3. In the Cowhouse Island Unit:
i. Dixon Memorial Wildlife Management Area rules, regulations, dates, and times apply.
ii. Conditions B.1, C.1.iii, and C.1.iv apply.
1. You may use only 10 horsepower motors or less on the refuge.
2. We prohibit possession of live bait fish.
3. We only allow the use of pole and line or rod and reel.
4. We prohibit paddleboarding, air boats, swimming, and wading.
5. All boats must be off the water by posted time.
6. In the Suwannee Canal Unit, we prohibit fishing in ponds and canals along Swamp Island Drive.
2. To participate in the quota youth waterfowl hunt, youth hunters must submit the Waterfowl Lottery Application (FWS Form 3-2355). You must pay an application fee to enter the hunt drawing.
3. Youth hunters, defined as those age 15 and younger, must remain within sight and normal voice contact of an adult age 21 or older. One adult may supervise no more than two youth hunters.
1. Conditions A1 and A4 apply.
3. Youth hunters, defined as those age 15 and younger, must remain within
1. Conditions A1, A4, and B3 apply.
2. To participate in the quota gun hunt for wheelchair-dependent hunters, hunters must submit the Quota Deer Hunt Application (FWS Form 3-2354). To participate in the quota Youth Turkey Hunt & Learn Weekend, youth hunters must submit the Big/Upland Game Hunt Application (FWS Form 3-2356). You must pay an application fee to enter these hunt drawings.
8. We prohibit the use of trail or game cameras.
3. We allow fishing from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
5. We allow only shotguns (20 gauge or larger; slug only), center-fire rifles, center-fire pistols, bows, and primitive weapons, in accordance with State regulations, for deer and hog hunting during the gun hunt.
8. We only allow camping at the designated camping area.
14. Youth hunters age 15 and younger must remain within sight and normal voice contact of an adult age 21 or older. One adult may supervise no more than one youth hunter.
The addition and revision read as follows:
1. On the Long Island Division, we allow hunting only from blinds constructed on sites posted by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources.
2. For hunting, you may use or possess only approved nontoxic shot shells while in the field, including shot shells used for hunting wild turkey (see § 32.2(k)).
1. Condition A2 applies.
2. We open refuge divisions for upland game hunting from
3. We close Fox Island Division to all upland game hunting from October 16 through December 31.
1. Condition A2 applies, except for when hunting for white-tailed deer.
2. We only allow portable tree stands from September 1 through January 31 of each year. The hunter's full name, address, and State-generated hunter identification number must be permanently attached in a visible location on the stand. Limit one stand per hunter.
3. On the Fox Island and Slim Island Divisions, we only allow deer hunting during the Statewide archery deer season and special State-managed hunts.
4. On the Cherry Box and Hickory Creek Units, we allow deer hunting during the Statewide archery deer season only.
5. On the Delair Division, we only allow deer hunting during special managed hunts and subject to the following conditions:
i. You must possess and carry a refuge permit (hunt letter) when hunting.
ii. You must register at the hunter sign-in/out station and record the sex and age of deer harvested on the Big Game Harvest Report (FWS Form 3-2359). Shooting hours end at 3 p.m. each day.
6. On the Long Island Division, we allow deer and turkey hunting in accordance with State seasons and regulations.
7. On the Slim Island Division, we allow turkey hunting in accordance with State seasons and regulations.
8. On the Fox Island Division, Cherry Box Unit, and Hickory Creek Unit, we allow turkey hunting during the State spring season, youth season, and fall archery season.
1. We prohibit the taking of turtle and frog (see § 27.21 of this chapter).
2. On the Fox Island Division, we only allow bank fishing along any portion of the Fox River from January 1 through October 15.
1. We allow the use of only portable or temporary blinds.
2. For hunting, you may possess only approved nontoxic shot shells while in the field, including shot shells used for hunting wild turkey (see § 32.2(k)).
The revisions read as follows:
5. You may leave temporary blinds (other than portable blinds) constructed of natural vegetation found on site overnight. We prohibit bringing any type of live or dead vegetation onto the refuge for any purpose at any time.
1. Conditions A1 and A3 apply.
5. Conditions A1, A3, and B2 apply.
2. We prohibit the take of reptiles and amphibians.
1. You may use natural vegetation to construct a temporary blind.
2. You may use portable hunting blinds.
3. We only allow waterfowl hunting by boat in Bow Creek. You may not create a wake while in Bow Creek.
2. You must obtain a refuge-issued permit to hunt deer on the refuge.
4. We prohibit retrieving deer or turkey from an area closed to deer or turkey hunting.
1. Conditions A1 and A3 apply.
1. Conditions A1, A3, A4, and B2 apply.
1. Conditions A1 through A3 apply.
1. We prohibit taking of frog, snake, or any other wildlife (see § 27.21 of this chapter).
7. Condition A2 applies.
The addition and revisions read as follows:
1. We consider all waterfowl and coot hunting to be youth hunts. An adult at least age 21 must supervise youth hunters during hunts. State regulations define youth hunter age and hunter-educations requirements. The youth must be capable of and must actively participate in such hunt by the possession and/or firing of a legal weapon during such hunt for the express purpose of harvesting game.
3. We allow waterfowl hunting on Wednesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays, and Sundays from one half hour before legal sunrise until 12 p.m. (noon), on Wednesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays, and Sundays, including early teal season, youth waterfowl hunt season, or other such special seasons that may be promulgated by law or statute. We will close the refuge to waterfowl and coot hunting during any segment of goose season that extends beyond the regular duck season.
8. When hunting migratory game birds, we only allow the use of dogs to locate, point, and retrieve.
6. Condition A10 applies.
1. All hunters must possess and carry a signed hunt permit while hunting on the refuge. This permit is free and available on the front cover of the refuge brochure.
2. We prohibit hunting in and/or shooting into or across any agricultural field, roadway, or canal.
3. An adult age 21 or older must supervise youth hunters during all hunts. State regulations define youth hunter age and hunter-educations requirements. One adult may supervise two youths during small game and migratory game bird hunts but may supervise only one youth during big game hunts. Youth(s) must remain within normal voice contact of the adult who is supervising them. Adult guardians are responsible for ensuring that youth hunters do not engage in conduct that would constitute a violation of refuge regulations.
4. We require waterfowl hunters to remove all portable blinds, boats, decoys, and other personal equipment from the refuge by 1 p.m. daily.
5. All hunters must check-in prior to hunting and check out after hunting at a refuge self-clearing check station. You must report all game taken on the refuge when checking out by using the check card.
6. We prohibit airboats and marsh buggies (tracked vehicles) on the refuge. We restrict motorized boat use to existing canals, ditches, trenasses, ponds, and from areas marked as nonmotorized areas only.
7. We prohibit parking, walking, or hunting within 150 feet (45 meters (m)) of any active oil well site, production facility, or equipment. We also prohibit hunting within 150 feet (45 m) of any public road, refuge road, building, residence, or designated public facility.
8. We allow hunting until 12 p.m. (noon). Hunters may only enter the refuge after 4 a.m.
9. We allow waterfowl hunting in Centerville, Garden City, Bayou Sale, North Bend East, and North Bend West Units during the State waterfowl season. We open no other units to migratory waterfowl hunting.
10. We only allow dogs to locate, point, and retrieve when hunting for migratory game birds.
11. We prohibit the use of any type of material used as flagging or trail markers, except reflective tacks.
1. We only allow hunting from the start of the State squirrel and rabbit seasons until the last day of State waterfowl season in the Coastal Zone, except that the Centerville Unit will be open until the last day of the State waterfowl season in the East Zone.
2. We prohibit squirrel and rabbit hunting in the Franklin Unit.
3. We prohibit upland game hunting on days corresponding with refuge deer gun hunts.
4. We allow hunters to enter the refuge after 4 a.m., but they must leave the refuge 1 hour after legal sunset.
5. We allow hunting 7 days per week beginning with the opening of the State season through the last day of the State waterfowl season in the Coastal Zone in the following refuge units: Garden City, Bayou Sale, North Bend—East, and North Bend—West Units. The Centerville Unit is in the East Zone. We open no other units to the hunting of upland game.
6. Conditions A1 through A3, A5 through A7, and A11 apply, except we allow the use of .17 and .22 caliber rimfire or smaller while hunting small game.
1. We allow hunting of deer only with firearms (see § 27.42 of this chapter) during 5 specific days during October and November. A youth gun hunt will occur during the last weekend of October. The general gun hunt will occur during the final full weekend in November. The youth gun hunt includes both Saturday and Sunday. The general gun hunt includes the Friday immediately before the weekend.
2. We allow archery deer hunting from the start of the State archery season until January 31. Hunters may take deer of either sex in accordance with State-approved archery equipment and regulations. The State season limits apply. The following units are open to archery deer hunting: Bayou Sale, North Bend—East, North Bend—West, and Garden City. The Centerville Unit is open until February 15. We close refuge archery hunting on those days that the refuge deer gun hunts occur.
3. We do not allow hunting within 500 feet (152.4 meters) of the Garden City parking area and boardwalk.
4. The Bayou Sale Unit is not open for big game firearm hunts.
5. We allow each hunter to possess only one deer per day; the deer may be a buck or a doe. State season limits apply.
6. You may take feral hogs only as incidental take with archery equipment while participating in the refuge deer archery hunt.
7. Hunters may use only portable deer stands. Hunters may erect deer stands one day before the deer archery season and must remove them from the refuge within 1 day after the season closes. Hunters may place only one deer stand on a refuge. Deer stands must have owner's name, address, and phone number clearly printed on the stand. Hunters must place stands in a nonhunting position when not in use (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
8. Conditions A1 through A3, A5 through A7, A11, and B3 apply.
9. We prohibit the use of trail cameras.
10. We prohibit the use of deer decoys.
11. We prohibit organized deer drives.
1. We prohibit the use of unattended nets, traps, or lines (trot, jug, bush, etc.).
2. The refuge is open from legal sunrise until legal sunset unless stated otherwise.
3. The Franklin Unit canals (birdfoot canals) will be open for motorized boats between April 15 and August 31. This unit is open to nonmotorized boats all year.
4. Condition A6 applies.
1. We allow waterfowl hunting on Wednesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays, and Sundays from
2. We do not open the refuge to goose hunting for that part of the season that extends beyond the regular duck season.
3. We allow only temporary blinds, and hunters must remove the blinds and decoys by 1 p.m. (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
4. Hunters must possess and carry a valid refuge hunt permit (signed brochure).
5. We prohibit air-thrust boats, aircraft, mud boats, and air-cooled propulsion engines on the refuge.
6. An adult age 21 or older must supervise youth hunters during all hunts. State regulations define youth hunter age and hunter-education requirements. One adult may supervise two youths during small game hunts and migratory bird hunts, but is only allowed to supervise one youth during big game hunts. Youths must remain within normal voice contact of the adult who is supervising them. Adult guardians are responsible for ensuring that youth hunters do not engage in conduct that would constitute a violation of refuge regulations.
7. We prohibit hunting or discharge of firearm (see § 27.42 of this chapter) within 150 feet (45 meters (m)) of any residence or structure adjacent to the refuge, from the centerline of any road, railroad, designated public use maintained trails, designated parking area, or other designated public use facilities. We prohibit hunting in refuge-designated closed areas, which we post on the refuge and identify in the refuge hunt permits (see § 27.31 of this chapter).
8. We open the refuge to public entry from
9. We only allow reflective tacks to be left on the refuge as trail markers.
1. We allow upland game hunting during the open State season. When hunting, you must possess only approved nontoxic shot (see § 32.2(k) of this chapter), shot size 4 or smaller, or 0.22 caliber rim-fire rifles or smaller.
2. We allow the use of dogs for hunting squirrel and rabbit only after the close of the State archery deer season.
3. We only allow dogs to locate, point, and retrieve when hunting for quail.
4. Conditions A4 through A9 apply.
5. All hunters, including archers (while on the ground), except waterfowl hunters must wear a hunter orange cap or hat during the dog season for squirrel and rabbit that is hunter orange, blaze pink, or other such color that meets State hunter safety requirements.
1. We are open only during the State season for archery hunting of deer.
2. We prohibit organized deer drives.
3. We allow the take of either-sex deer in accordance with State-approved archery equipment and regulations. The State season limits apply. Archery equipment, which State regulations define as legal gear for archery season, will be a legal means of take during the deer archery season.
4. We allow placement of temporary deer stands 1 day prior to the start of deer archery season. Hunters must remove all deer stands within 1 day after the archery deer season closes. Hunters are allowed to place only one deer stand on the refuge. Deer stands must have the owner's name, address, and phone number clearly printed on the stand. We prohibit hunting stands on trees painted with white bands.
5. We allow take of feral hogs only as incidental take with archery equipment while participating in the refuge deer archery hunt.
6. Conditions A4 through A9 apply.
7. We prohibit the use of trail cameras.
8. We prohibit the use of deer decoys.
1. You may fish only from
2. You must only use rods and reel or pole and lines while fishing.
3. We prohibit the use of trotlines, limblines, slat traps, gar sets, nets, or alligator lines on the refuge. We allow take of bait with cast nets 8 feet (2.4 meters) in diameter or less.
4. We allow recreational crabbing.
5. Condition A5 applies.
6. You must attend to any fishing, crabbing, and crawfishing equipment at all times.
1. We allow hunting from
2. We allow woodcock hunting in accordance with State regulations using only approved nontoxic shot (see § 32.2(k)) size #4 or smaller.
3. We allow public hunting on designated areas during the open State season for duck, goose, coot, and woodcock. We designate areas where public use is restricted in the refuge hunt permit (signed brochure) or by designated signage.
4. When hunting for migratory game birds, we only allow dogs to locate, point, and retrieve.
5. Hunters must possess and carry a valid refuge hunt permit (signed refuge brochure).
6. An adult age 21 or older must supervise youth hunters during all hunts. State regulations define youth hunter age and hunter-education requirements. One adult is allowed to supervise two youths during small game hunts and migratory bird hunts but may supervise only one youth during big game hunts. Youths must remain within normal voice contact of the adult who is supervising them. Adult guardians are responsible for ensuring that youth hunters do not engage in conduct that would constitute a violation of refuge regulations.
7. We prohibit hunting or discharge of firearms (see § 27.42 of this chapter) within 150 feet (45.7 meters) from the centerline of any public road, refuge road, designated or maintained trail, building, residence, designated camping area, designated public facility, or from or across aboveground oil, gas, or electric facilities. We prohibit hunting in refuge-designated closed areas, which we post on the refuge and identify in the refuge hunt permits (signed brochure).
8. For the purpose of hunting, we prohibit possession of slugs, buckshot, rifle, or pistol ammunition unless otherwise specified.
9. We allow primitive camping within 100 feet (30 meters) of designated streams. These include either bank of the Boque Chitto River, Wilson Slough, and West Pearl River south of Wilson Slough; refuge lands along the East Pearl River; and Holmes Bayou. Campers must mark their campsite with the owner's name, address, phone number, and dates of occupancy placed in a conspicuous location in the center of camp.
10. We prohibit horses, trail cameras, all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and utility-terrain vehicles (UTVs), except UTVs are allowed on designated physically challenged hunt trails and are restricted to physically challenged State-issued permit holders and persons 60 years or
11. We only allow reflective tacks to be left on the refuge as trail markers.
12. We allow State-licensed physically challenged hunters and persons 60 years or older with proof of age exclusive use of designated physically challenged hunt trails for any open hunt seasons on the refuge. Specific hunt trails are designated on the refuge hunt permit (signed brochure). An assistant may accompany the physically challenged or person 60 years or older while hunting, but the assistant may not hunt.
1. We allow the use of dogs for rabbit, squirrel, raccoon, and opossum on specific dates listed in the refuge hunt brochure.
2. We will close the refuge to hunting (except waterfowl) and camping when the Pearl River reaches 15.5 feet (4.65 meters) on the Pearl River Gauge at Pearl River, Louisiana.
3. We prohibit the take of feral hog during any upland game hunts.
4. All hunters, except waterfowl hunters and nighttime raccoon and opossum hunters, must abide by State WMA hunter-orange or blaze pink (or other approved colors by the State) regulations during any open deer firearm or primitive firearm season on the refuge. During the dog season for squirrels and rabbits, all hunters, including archery hunters (while on the ground), except waterfowl hunters, must wear a hunter-orange (or blaze pink in Louisiana, or other approved color by the State) hat or cap. Deer hunters hunting from concealed blinds must display State WMA hunter-orange or blaze-pink (as required by State regulations) above or around their blinds; this must be visible from 360 degrees.
5. Conditions A5 through A12 apply, except you may use .22- caliber rifles or smaller, and the nontoxic shot in your possession while hunting must be size 4 or smaller (see § 32.2(k)).
1. Conditions A5 through A7, A9 through A10, A12, B2, and B4 apply.
2. Hunters may erect deer stands one day before the deer archery season and must remove them from the refuge within 1 day after this season closes. We allow only one deer stand per hunter on the refuge. Deer stands must have the owner's name, address, and phone number clearly printed on the stand.
3. We allow take of hog as incidental game while participating in the refuge archery, primitive weapon, and general gun deer hunts and where otherwise specified using legal methods of take for the hunt. We list specific dates for the special hog hunt in February in the refuge hunt permit (signed brochure). During the special hog hunt in February, you must use trained hog-hunting dogs to aid in the take of hog. During the special hog hunt, we allow take of hog from
4. You must kill all hogs prior to removal from the refuge.
5. We prohibit the use of deer and turkey gobbler decoys.
6. We prohibit using shot larger than BB lead or T steel while hunting during turkey season.
1. We only allow cotton limb lines.
2. Conditions A8 and A10 apply.
3. We close the fishing ponds at the Pearl River Turnaround to fishing from April through the first full week of June and to boating during the months of April, May, June, and July.
4. When the Pearl River Turnaround area is open, we allow boats that do not have gasoline-powered engines attached in the fishing ponds at the Pearl River Turnaround. Anglers must hand-launch these boats into the ponds. When open, we only allow hook and line as a legal method of take in the fishing ponds at the Pearl River Turnaround.
5. We allow trotlines, but the last 5 feet of trotline must be 100% cotton.
6. The Pearl River Turnaround area, when open, is open
3. When hunting for migratory game birds, we only allow the use of dogs to locate, point, and retrieve.
9. An adult age 21 or older must supervise youth hunters during all hunts. State regulations define youth hunter age and hunter-educations requirements. One adult may supervise two youths during small game and migratory game bird hunts but must supervise only one youth during big game hunts. Youth(s) must remain within normal voice contact of the adult who is supervising them. Adult guardians are responsible for ensuring that youth hunters do not engage in conduct that would constitute a violation of refuge regulations.
4. Conditions A4 through A10 apply.
1. Conditions A4 through A10 apply with the following exception to condition A9: Each adult is allowed to supervise only one youth hunter.
3. We only allow portable deer stands (see § 27.93 of this chapter). Hunters may erect deer stands 1 day before the deer archery season and must remove them from the refuge within 1 day after the season closes. Hunters may place only one deer stand on a refuge. Deer stands must have the owner's name, address, and phone number clearly printed on the stand.
5. We allow the take of hog(s) only with archery equipment during the archery deer season.
3. Conditions A6 and A7 apply.
3. When hunting migratory game birds, we only allow the use of dogs to locate, point, and retrieve.
4. An adult age 21 or older must supervise youth hunters during all hunts. State regulations define youth hunter age and hunter-educations requirements. One adult may supervise two youths during small game and migratory game bird hunts. An adult may supervise only one youth during big game hunts. Youth must remain within normal voice contact of the adult who is supervising them. Parents or adult guardians are responsible for
7. We prohibit organized deer drives.
8. Conditions A3, A4, and A7 apply.
4. Condition A7 applies.
1. We allow hunting of duck and coot on Tuesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays, and Sundays until 2:00 p.m. during the State season. We prohibit migratory bird hunting during refuge gun hunts for deer.
2. We allow refuge hunters to enter the refuge no earlier than 4 a.m., and they must leave no later than 2 hours after legal sunset unless they are participating in the refuge nighttime raccoon hunt.
3. In areas posted “Area Closed” or “No Waterfowl Hunting Zone,” we prohibit hunting of migratory birds at any time. The Public Use Regulations brochure will be available at the refuge headquarters no later than August.
4. We allow nonmotorized boats, electric motors, and boats with motors 10 horsepower (hp) or less in refuge lakes, streams, and bayous. Boaters must follow State boating regulations, including those for navigation lights. We prohibit boat storage on the refuge. Hunters/anglers must remove boats daily (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
5. We allow all-terrain vehicle (ATV) travel on designated trails for access typically from September 15 to the last day of the refuge squirrel season. We open designated trails from 4 a.m. to no later than 2 hours after legal sunset unless otherwise specified. We define an ATV as an off-road vehicle (not legal for highway use) with factory specifications not to exceed the following: Weight 750 pounds (337.5 kilograms (kg)), length 85 inches (212.5 centimeters (cm)), and width 48 inches (120 cm). We restrict ATV tires to those no larger than 26 inches (66 cm) by 12 inches (30 cm) with a 1-inch (2.5-cm) lug height and maximum allowable tire pressure of 12 psi. Hunters/anglers using the refuge physically challenged all-terrain trails must possess the State's Physically Challenged Program Hunter Permit or be age 60 or older. Additional physically challenged access information will be available at the refuge headquarters.
6. We prohibit field dressing of game within 150 feet (45 meters (m)) of parking areas, maintained roads, and trails.
7. An adult age 18 or older must supervise youth hunters age 17 or younger during all hunts. One adult may supervise two youths during small game and migratory bird hunts but may supervise only one youth during big game hunts. Youth must remain within normal voice contact of the adult who is supervising them. Parents or adult guardians are responsible for ensuring that hunters age 17 or younger do not engage in conduct that would constitute a violation of refuge regulations.
1. We allow nighttime raccoon hunting beginning typically the third Saturday in December and typically ending January 31. We allow raccoon hunters to hunt from legal sunset to legal sunrise with the aid of dogs, horses, and mules, and with use of lights. We allow such use of lights on the refuge only at the point of kill. We prohibit all other use of lights for hunting on the refuge. Hunt dates will be available at refuge headquarters typically in July. We prohibit ATVs during the raccoon hunt. Hunters must attempt to take treed raccoons.
2. We allow squirrel and rabbit hunting with and without dogs:
i. We allow hunting without dogs from the beginning of the State season to December 31; during this time period, we do not require hunters to wear hunter orange.
ii. We allow squirrel and rabbit hunting with or without dogs from January 1 to the last day of February; during this time period, we require a minimum of a solid-hunter-orange cap.
iii. We allow no more than three dogs per hunting party.
3. We close squirrel and rabbit hunting during the following gun hunts for deer: refuge-wide youth hunt, primitive firearms hunt, and modern firearms hunt.
4. In areas posted “Area Closed” and “No Hunting Zone,” we prohibit upland game hunting at any time.
5. When hunting, we allow .22 caliber and smaller rimfire weapons.
6. Conditions A2 and A4 through A7 apply.
1. Deer archery season will begin the first Saturday in November and will conclude on January 31. We prohibit archery hunting during the following refuge-wide deer hunts: youth gun hunt and modern firearms hunts. We prohibit possession of pods, drug-tipped arrows, or other chemical substances.
2. The deer primitive firearms season will occur between November 1 and January 31. We allow all legal primitive firearms as defined by State regulations.
3. During the deer primitive firearms season, hunters may fit any legal primitive firearms with magnified scopes. We allow hunters using primitive weapons to hunt reforested areas. We prohibit youth hunters from using modern firearms during the primitive weapon hunt.
4. We will conduct two quota-modern-firearms hunts for deer typically in the months of November and/or December. Hunt dates and permit application procedures will be available at refuge headquarters no later than August. Hunters using primitive weapons or muzzleloaders must follow all modern firearm regulations (no hunting in reforested areas). We prohibit hunting and/or shooting into or across any reforested area during the quota hunt for deer. We require a quota hunt permit for these hunts.
5. We will conduct guided quota youth deer hunts and guided quota deer hunts for the Full-Time Wheelchair Users in the Greenlea Bend area typically in December and January. Hunt dates and permit application procedures will be available at the refuge headquarters typically in July. For the guided quota youth hunts, we consider youth to be ages 8 through 15.
6. We will conduct a refuge-wide youth deer hunt. Hunt dates will be available at refuge headquarters typically in July. An adult at least age 18 must supervise youth hunters age 15 and younger during all hunts. One adult may supervise two youths during small game and migratory bird hunts but may supervise only one youth during big game hunts. Youth must remain within normal voice contact of the adult who is supervising them. Parents or adult guardians are responsible for ensuring that hunters age 16 and younger do not engage in conduct that would constitute a violation of refuge regulations.
7. Hunters may take only one deer (one buck or one doe) per day during refuge deer hunts except during guided youth and wheelchair-bound hunts where the limit will be one antlerless and one antlered deer per day.
8. We allow turkey hunting the first 16 days of the State turkey season. We will conduct a youth turkey hunt the Saturday and Sunday before the regular State turkey season. Hunters may harvest two bearded turkeys per season. We allow the use and possession of lead shot while turkey hunting on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)). We allow use of nonmotorized bicycles on designated all-terrain vehicle trails. Although you may hunt turkey without displaying a solid-hunter-orange cap or vest during your turkey hunt, we do recommend its use.
9. Conditions A2, A4, A5, and A6 apply.
10. In areas posted “Area Closed” or “No Hunting Zone,” we prohibit big game hunting at any time. We close “Closed Areas” (designated on the Public Use Regulations brochure map) to all hunts. We prohibit shooting into or across any closed area with a gun or archery equipment.
11. We allow muzzleloader hunters to discharge their primitive firearms at the end of each hunt safely into the ground at least 150 feet (135 meters) from any designated public road, maintained road, trail, fire break, dwelling, or above-ground oil and gas production facility. We define a maintained road or trail as one that has been mowed, disked, or plowed, or one that is free of trees.
12. We prohibit deer hunters leaving deer stands unattended before the opening day of the refuge archery season. Hunters must remove stands by the end of the last day of the refuge archery season (see § 27.93 of this chapter). Hunters must clearly mark stands left unattended on the refuge with the name and address of the stand owner. Hunters must remove portable stands from trees daily and place freestanding stands in a nonhunting position when unattended.
13. We allow hunting with slugs, rifle, or pistol ammunition larger than .22 caliber rimfire only during the quota hunts for deer. We prohibit use of buckshot when hunting.
1. We allow anglers to enter the refuge no earlier than 4 a.m., and they must depart no later than 2 hours after legal sunset.
2. We prohibit the taking of turtle (see § 27.21 of this chapter).
3. Condition A4 applies.
4. We prohibit fish cleaning within 150 feet (45 meters) of parking areas, maintained roads, and trails.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
1. We require every hunter to possess and carry a personally signed Migratory Bird Hunt Application (FWS Form 3-2357). Permits and information are available from the refuge.
2. We allow hunters to enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting hours, and they must exit the refuge by 1 hour past legal shooting hours.
3. You may hunt American woodcock and snipe on the Edmunds Division and that part of the Baring Division that lies west of State Route 191.
4. You may hunt waterfowl (duck and goose) in that part of the Edmunds Division that lies north of Hobart Stream and west of U.S. Route 1, and in those areas east of U.S. Route 1, and refuge lands that lie south of South Trail; and in that portion of the Baring Division that lies west of State Route 191.
5. We prohibit hunting waterfowl in the Nat Smith Field and Marsh or Bills Hill Field or Ponds on the Edmunds Division.
6. We only allow portable or temporary blinds and decoys that must be removed from the refuge following each day's hunt. We prohibit construction or use of any permanent blind.
7. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot when hunting woodcock and snipe on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
8. We prohibit use of motorized or mechanized vehicles and equipment in designated Wilderness Areas. This includes all vehicles and items such as winches, pulleys, and wheeled game carriers. You must remove animals harvested within the Wilderness Areas by hand without the aid of mechanical equipment of any type.
9. We prohibit dog training on the refuge.
1. We require every hunter to possess and carry a personally signed Big/Upland Game Hunt Application (FWS Form 3-2356). Permits and regulations are available from the refuge.
2. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot when hunting upland game on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
3. We prohibit use of motorized or mechanized vehicles and equipment in designated Wilderness Areas. This includes all vehicles and items such as winches, pulleys, and wheeled game carriers. You must remove animals harvested within the Wilderness Areas by hand without the aid of mechanical equipment of any type.
4. We allow hunters to enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting hours, and they must exit the refuge by 1 hour past legal shooting hours, except for hunters pursuing raccoons at night.
5. We prohibit hunting of upland game species on refuge lands between April 1 and September 30.
6. You must notify the refuge office prior to hunting raccoon or red fox with trailing dogs.
7. We prohibit dog training on the refuge.
1. Conditions B1 and B3 apply.
5. We allow portable tree stands, blinds, and ladders. You must clearly
8. We prohibit use of firearms to hunt bear and coyote during the archery deer season on that part of the Baring Division that lies east of Route 191. We prohibit the use of firearms, other than a muzzleloader, to hunt coyote during the deer muzzleloader season on that part of the Baring Division that lies east of Route 191.
9. You must notify the refuge office prior to hunting black bear, bobcat, or eastern coyote with trailing dogs.
10. We prohibit dog training on the refuge.
11. We prohibit hunting in the following areas:
i. The South Magurrewock Area.
ii. The North Magurrewock Area.
iii. The posted safety zone around the refuge headquarters.
iv. The Southern Gravel Pit.
2. You may only possess approved nontoxic shot when hunting woodcock and snipe (see § 32.2(k)).
1. You may only possess approved nontoxic shot when hunting upland game on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
2. We allow the use of dogs for hunting; however, the dogs must be under the hunter's control at all times.
5. Hunters must retrieve all species, including coyotes, harvested on the refuge.
6. We prohibit night hunting from
1. We allow white-tailed deer hunting on Sawyers Marsh and Gouldsboro Bay Divisions, Bois Bubert Island, and designated areas of the Petit Manan Point. Petit Manan Point is open only during the State-prescribed muzzleloader season.
2. We allow black bear hunting on the Sawyers Marsh and Gouldsboro Bay Divisions during the firearm season for white-tailed deer.
4. We allow hunters to enter the refuge 1 hour prior to legal sunrise and remain on the refuge 1 hour after legal sunset.
1. Prior to entering designated refuge hunting areas, you must obtain a Migratory Bird Hunt Application (FWS Form 3-2357), pay a recreation fee, and sign and carry the permit at all times.
2. We open Designated Youth Hunting Areas to hunters age 15 and younger who possess and carry a refuge hunting permit. Youth hunters must be accompanied by an adult age 18 or older. The accompanying adult must possess and carry a refuge hunting permit and may also hunt.
3. You may only possess approved nontoxic shot for hunting woodcock and snipe on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
4. You may use seasonal blinds with a Special Use Permit (FWS Form 3-1383-G). A permitted seasonal blind is available to permitted hunters on a first-come, first-served basis. The permit holder for the blind is responsible for the removal of the blind at the end of the season and compliance with all conditions of the Special Use Permit.
5. We close the Moody, Little River, Biddeford Pool, and Goosefare Brook divisions of the refuge to all migratory bird hunting.
1. Conditions A1 and A5 apply.
2. For upland game, you may only take pheasant, quail, and grouse (no mammals) by falconry on the refuge during State seasons.
3. You may only possess approved nontoxic shot for hunting upland game on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
4. We close the Moody, Little River, and Biddeford Pool divisions of the refuge to all upland game hunting.
1. Prior to entering designated refuge hunting areas, you must obtain a Big/Upland Game Hunt Application (FWS Form 3-2356), pay a recreation fee, and sign and carry the permit at all times.
2. Condition A5 applies.
3. We allow hunting of deer and turkey with shotgun and archery only. We prohibit rifles and muzzleloading firearms for hunting.
4. We allow turkey hunting during the fall season only, as designated by the State.
5. We close the Moody and Biddeford Pool divisions of the refuge to white-tailed deer and turkey hunting.
6. We allow archery on only those areas of the Little River division open to hunting.
7. We allow hunting of fox and coyote with archery or shotgun with a refuge big game permit, during State firearm deer season. We prohibit night hunting from
1. We allow sport fishing along the shoreline on the following areas of the refuge:
i. At the Brave Boat Harbor division on the north side (York) of the stream crossing under Route 103, beginning at Route 103 then downstream to the first railroad trestle.
ii. At the Moody division on the north side of the Ogunquit River and downstream of Route 1, beginning at the refuge boundary then downstream a distance of 500 feet (150 meters).
iii. At the Moody division on the east side of Stevens Brook and downstream of Bourne Avenue, beginning at Bourne Avenue then downstream to where the refuge ends near Ocean Avenue.
iv. At the Lower Wells division on the west side of the Webhannet River downstream of Mile Road, from Mile Road north to the first creek.
v. At the Upper Wells division on the south side of the Merriland River downstream of Skinner Mill Road, beginning at the refuge boundary and then east along the oxbow to the woods.
vi. At the Mousam River division on the north side of the Mousam River downstream of Route 9, beginning at the refuge boundary and then east to a point
vii. At the Goosefare Brook division on the south side of Goosefare Brook where it flows into the Atlantic Ocean.
viii. At the Spurwink River division on the west side (Scarborough) of the Spurwink River upstream of Route 77, beginning at Route 77 and then upstream approximately 1,000 feet (300 meters) to a point near the fork in the river.
2. We allow car-top launching from legal sunrise to legal sunset on the following areas of the refuge:
i. At Brave Boat Harbor division on Chauncey Creek at the intersection of Cutts Island Road and Sea Point Road.
ii. At Little River division at the end of Granite Point Road into the Little River.
iii. At Spurwink River division on the upstream side of Route 77 at the old road crossing.
3. We allow fishing from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
4. We prohibit lead jigs and sinkers.
5. We prohibit collection of bait on the refuge.
1. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot when hunting crow, woodcock, and snipe on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
2. We prohibit dog training on the refuge.
1. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot when hunting upland game on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
2. We allow eastern coyote hunting from October 1 to March 31.
3. We allow hunters to enter the refuge 1 hour before legal shooting hours and they must exit the refuge by 1 hour past legal shooting hours, except for hunters pursuing raccoons and coyotes at night.
4. The hunter must retrieve all species, including coyotes, harvested on the refuge.
5. We prohibit dog training on the refuge.
1. We allow hunters to enter the refuge 1 hour before legal shooting hours and they must exit the refuge by 1 hour past legal shooting hours.
2. We allow portable tree stands, blinds, and ladders. You must clearly label any tree stand, blind, or ladder left on the refuge overnight with your name, address, phone number, and hunting license number. We require all tree stands, blinds, and ladders to be removed from the refuge on the last day of the muzzleloader deer season. We prohibit construction or use of permanent tree stands, blinds, or ladders.
3. We prohibit dog training on the refuge.
1. We allow fishing on the waters of and from the banks of Baker Brook, Birch Stream, Buzzy Brook, Dudley Brook, Johnson Brook, Little Birch Stream, Little Buzzy Brook, Sandy Stream, and Sunkhaze Stream.
2. We prohibit trapping of bait fish on the refuge.
1. Hunters must remove temporary blinds, boats, and decoys from the refuge following each day's hunt (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
2. We prohibit dog training on the refuge.
3. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot when hunting snipe, crow, and woodcock on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
1. We prohibit night hunting from
2. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot when hunting upland game on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
3. Condition A2 applies.
1. We prohibit night hunting from
2. Condition A2 applies.
3. Hunters must retrieve all species, including coyotes, harvested on the refuge.
4. We allow temporary blinds and tree stands that are clearly marked with the owner's name and address. Temporary blinds and tree stands may be erected no earlier than 14 days prior to the hunting season and must be removed within 14 days after the hunting season.
The following refuge units have been opened for hunting and/or fishing, and are listed in alphabetical order with applicable refuge-specific regulations.
1. You must obtain a refuge waterfowl hunting permit (signed brochure) by signing the corresponding season's refuge waterfowl hunting brochure in ink. You must abide by the terms and conditions outlined in the “Blackwater NWR Waterfowl Hunting Brochure” (see § 32.2(e) of this chapter). This brochure contains seasons, bag limits, methods of hunting, maps depicting areas open to hunting, hunt unit reservation procedures, and the terms and conditions under which we issue hunting permits. They are available at the refuge visitor center and on the refuge's website.
2. Up to three additional hunters may accompany you on your reserved unit.
1. General Hunt Regulations.
i. You must obtain a deer or turkey hunting permit (Big/Upland Game Hunt
ii. We prohibit organized deer drives, unless otherwise authorized by the refuge manager on designated hunt days.
iii. We prohibit shooting a projectile from a firearm, muzzleloader, bow, or crossbow from, down, or across any refuge road. A refuge road is any road that is traveled by vehicular traffic.
iv. We prohibit leaving deer or turkey entrails or other waste within 50 feet (15.2 meters) of any road, parking area, trail, or refuge structure on the refuge.
v. You must check all deer harvested at the refuge-sponsored check station during hunt days when the refuge-sponsored check station is open. If you fail to check deer during operation hours of the check station, you must notify the hunt coordinator by 12 p.m. (noon) on the day after your kill.
vi. You must adhere to the bag limits set forth annually in the brochure. Deer harvested on the refuge do not count toward State bag limits but must be recorded and checked with the State. Deer harvested on the refuge must be checked pursuant to the refuge hunt in which they are taken, regardless of the weapon used or corresponding State season.
vii. We prohibit the use of rimfire or centerfire rifles and all handguns, including muzzleloading pistols, for hunting.
2. Archery Deer Hunt. We do not allow archery hunters to hunt within areas designated for the youth hunt on designated days.
3. Turkey Hunt. We allow turkey hunt permit holders to have an assistant, who must remain within sight and normal voice contact.
4. Youth Deer and Turkey Hunt.
i. We allow youth hunters to hunt on designated areas on designated days (Youth Hunt) if they meet the criteria of a “youth hunter” as defined by State law.
ii. Deer taken during youth days do not count toward the State bag limit and are in addition to any other deer taken during any other hunts on the refuge.
5. Designated Disabled Hunt.
i. Disabled hunters are required to have their Federal Government Access pass (OMB Control 1024-0252) in their possession while hunting in disabled areas.
ii. Disabled hunters may have an assistant, age 18 or older, who must remain within sight and normal voice contact while hunting. Assistants must possess a valid refuge hunt brochure (permit), signed in ink, and a valid government-issued photo identification.
1. We allow fishing and crabbing only from April 1 through September 30 during daylight hours in refuge waters, unless otherwise authorized by the refuge manager.
2. We allow only fishing and crabbing in the Big Blackwater and the Little Blackwater River by boat and from designated areas listed in the refuge fishing brochure.
3. We prohibit boat launching from refuge lands except from the car-top boat launch located near the Blackwater River Bridge on Route 335. Only canoes, kayaks, and small jon boats under 17 feet are considered car-top boats.
4. We prohibit the use of airboats on refuge waters.
1. General Hunt Regulations.
i. You must obtain a deer or turkey hunting permit (Big/Upland Game Hunt Application, FWS Form 3-2356). Hunting brochures contain hunting application procedures, seasons, bag limits, methods of hunting, maps depicting areas open to hunting, and the terms and conditions under which we issue hunting permits.
ii. We prohibit shooting a projectile from a firearm, muzzleloader, bow, or crossbow from, down, or across any refuge road. A refuge road is any road that is traveled by vehicular traffic.
iii. We prohibit leaving deer entrails or other waste within 50 feet (15.2 meters) of any refuge road, trail, parking area, or structure.
iv. We prohibit the use of rimfire or centerfire rifles and all handguns, including muzzleloading pistols, for hunting.
2. Youth Deer Hunt. We allow hunters to hunt on designated areas on designated days (Youth Hunt) if they meet the criteria of a “youth hunter” as defined by State law.
3. Designated Disabled Hunt.
i. All disabled hunters must possess a Federal Government Access pass (OMB Control 1024-0252). Disabled hunters are required to have their Federal Government Access pass (OMB Control 1024-0252) in their possession while hunting in disabled areas.
ii. Disabled hunters may have an assistant who must be age 18 or older and remain within sight and normal voice contact. Assistants must possess a valid refuge hunt brochure (permit), signed in ink, and a valid government-issued photo identification.
1. We allow fishing and crabbing from designated shoreline areas located at the Ingleside Recreation Area from legal sunrise to legal sunset, April 1 through September 30.
2. We allow fishing from designated shoreline areas located at the Chester River end of Boxes Point and Duck Inn Trails from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
3. We prohibit boat launching from refuge lands except for canoes/kayaks at the canoe/kayak ramp located at the Ingleside Recreation Area.
1. We require a Refuge Hunt Application (PRR Hunt Form #1).
2. Goose, duck, and dove hunting is suspended during the muzzleloader and firearms seasons, with the exceptions that waterfowl hunting will remain open during the 2-day January firearms season and during the early muzzleloader season, and waterfowl hunters are restricted to hunting only Blue Heron Pond, Lake Allen, and Area Z.
1. Conditions A1 and A2 apply.
2. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot while hunting in the field (see § 32.2(k)), except for the use of .22-caliber rimfire rifles during the months of December and January only to hunt squirrel.
1. Conditions A1 and A2 apply.
2. We require turkey hunters to use #4, #5, or #6 nontoxic shot; vertical bows; or crossbows.
3. We prohibit deer drives or anyone taking part in any deer drive. We define
1. We prohibit the use and/or possession of lead sinkers.
2. We allow the use of earthworms as the only source of live bait. We prohibit bloodworms, fish, or other animals or parts of animals to be used as bait.
3. Anglers may take the following species: Chain pickerel, catfish, golden shiner, eel, and sunfish (includes bluegill, black crappie, warmouth, and pumpkinseed). Maryland State daily harvest limits apply unless otherwise noted. We allow take of one chain pickerel per day.
4. We prohibit the use of any type of watercraft on North Tract.
The revisions read as follows:
1. We allow woodcock hunting within the portions of the refuge located north of Hudson Road, except those areas north of Hudson Road that are designated as “archery only” hunting as shown on the current refuge hunting map. Hunters must obtain and possess a refuge-specific hunting permit to hunt woodcock on the refuge.
2. You may begin scouting hunting areas 4 weeks prior to the opening day of your permitted season. We require possession of valid refuge hunting permits while scouting.
3. We prohibit the training of dogs on the refuge.
1. We allow shotgun hunting for ruffed grouse, cottontail rabbit, and gray squirrel within those portions of the refuge located north of Hudson Road, except those areas north of Hudson Road designated as “archery only” hunting as shown on the current refuge hunting map.
2. Hunters must obtain and possess a refuge-specific hunting permit to hunt designated upland game on the refuge.
3. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot while hunting upland game on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
1. We allow shotgun and muzzleloader hunting of white-tailed deer, as well as shotgun hunting of turkey, within the portions of the refuge located north of Hudson Road, except those areas north of Hudson Road that are designated as “archery only” hunting as shown on the current refuge hunting map.
2. We allow archery deer and archery turkey hunting within all portions of the refuge during the hunting seasons for these species.
3. Hunters must obtain and possess a refuge-specific hunting permit to hunt deer and turkey on the refuge.
4. You may begin scouting hunting areas 4 weeks prior to the opening day of your permitted season. We require possession of valid refuge hunting permits while scouting.
5. We prohibit driving deer by any means on the refuge.
6. One nonhunting companion may accompany each permitted hunter. We prohibit nonhunting companions from hunting, but they may assist in other means. All companions must carry identification and stay with the hunter.
7. You may use temporary tree stands and/or ground blinds while engaged in hunting deer during the applicable archery, shotgun, or muzzleloader deer seasons or while hunting turkey. We allow hunters to keep one tree stand or ground blind on each refuge during the permitted season. Hunters must mark ground blinds with the hunter's permit number. Hunters must mark tree stands with the hunter's permit number in such a fashion that all numbers are visible from the ground. Hunters must remove all temporary tree stands and ground blinds by the 15th day after the end of the hunter's permitted season.
1. We allow fishing from designated locations on the banks of Puffer Pond. We prohibit the use of motorized and nonmotorized boats on Puffer Pond.
2. We allow catch and release fishing only.
3. We allow the use of live bait with the exception of any amphibians or reptiles (frogs, salamanders, etc.)
4. We prohibit ice fishing on the refuge except for special refuge events.
1. We allow archery hunting of whitetail deer within the portions of the Concord Unit of the refuge that are located north of Massachusetts Route 225. We also allow archery hunting of whitetail deer within the portions of the Sudbury Unit of the refuge that are located north of Stonebridge Road in Wayland, Massachusetts, and south of Lincoln Road/Sherman's Bridge Road on the Sudbury and Wayland Town Line. Hunters must obtain and possess a valid refuge hunting permit to hunt deer on the refuge.
2. We prohibit the use of firearms for hunting deer on the refuge.
3. Hunters may begin scouting hunting areas beginning 4 weeks prior to the opening day of their permitted season. We require possession of valid refuge hunting permits while scouting. We prohibit the use of dogs during scouting.
4. We allow one nonhunting companion to accompany each permitted hunter. We prohibit nonhunting companions from hunting, but they can assist in other means. All companions must carry identification and stay with the hunter.
5. We prohibit driving deer by any means on the refuge.
6. You may use temporary tree stands and/or ground blinds while engaged in hunting deer during the applicable archery season. We allow hunters to keep one tree stand or ground blind on each refuge during the permitted season. Hunters must mark ground blinds with their permit number. Hunters must mark tree stands with their permit number in such a fashion that all
1. We may close the refuge shoreline and beach area to surf fishing and over-sand vehicle use during varying times of the year based on biological needs and beach conditions. Seasonal closures are delineated with posted signs.
2. We require a permit obtained from the Trustees of Reservations for the use of over-sand vehicles on the refuge.
1. We allow waterfowl and common snipe hunting within the portions of the refuge located south of Massachusetts Route 2 and west of Tank Road.
2. We allow woodcock hunting within the portions of the refuge south of Massachusetts Route 2 and west of the B&M railroad tracks; north of Massachusetts Route 2 and south of Hospital Road; and within the portions of the refuge along the westerly side of the Nashua River located north of the commuter rail tracks in Shirley, Massachusetts. Hunters must obtain and possess a refuge-specific hunting permit to hunt woodcock on the refuge.
3. Hunters may begin scouting hunting areas 4 weeks prior to the opening day of your permitted season. We require possession of valid refuge hunting permits while scouting. We prohibit the use of dogs during scouting.
4. We prohibit the training of dogs on the refuge.
5. One nonhunting companion may accompany each permitted hunter. We prohibit nonhunting companions from hunting, but they can assist in other means. All companions must carry identification and stay with the hunter.
1. We allow shotgun hunting of ruffed grouse, cottontail rabbit, and gray squirrels within the areas of the refuge located south of Massachusetts Route 2 and west of the B&M railroad tracks; north of Massachusetts Route 2 and south of Hospital Road; and within the portions of the refuge along the westerly side of the Nashua River located north of the commuter rail tracks in Shirley, Massachusetts. Hunters must obtain and possess a refuge-specific hunting permit to hunt upland game on the refuge.
2. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot while hunting upland game on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
1. We allow shotgun, archery, and muzzleloader hunting of white-tailed deer, as well as shotgun and archery hunting of turkey, within the portions of the refuge located south of Massachusetts Route 2 and west of the B&M railroad tracks.
2. We allow archery deer and archery turkey hunting within the portions of the refuge located south of Massachusetts Route 2 and east of the B&M railroad tracks, and within the portions of the refuge along the easterly side of the Nashua River located north of the commuter rail tracks in Ayer, Massachusetts.
3. We allow archery deer hunting as well as shotgun and archery turkey hunting within the portions of the refuge located north of Massachusetts Route 2 and south of Hospital Road, and within the portions of the refuge along the westerly side of the Nashua River located north of the commuter rail tracks in Shirley, Massachusetts.
4. Hunters must obtain and possess a refuge-specific hunting permit to hunt deer and turkey on the refuge.
5. Hunters may begin scouting hunting areas 4 weeks prior to the opening day of your permitted season. We require possession of valid refuge hunting permits while scouting. We prohibit the use of dogs during scouting.
6. One nonhunting companion may accompany each permitted hunter. We prohibit nonhunting companions from hunting, but they can assist in other means. All companions must carry identification and stay with the hunter.
7. We prohibit driving deer by any means on the refuge.
8. Hunters may use temporary tree stands and/or ground blinds while engaged in hunting deer during the applicable archery, shotgun, or muzzleloader deer seasons or while hunting turkey. We allow hunters to keep one tree stand or ground blind on each refuge during the permitted season. Hunters must mark ground blinds with their permit number. Hunters must mark tree stands with their permit number in such a fashion that all numbers are visible from the ground. Hunters must remove all temporary tree stands and ground blinds by the 15th day after the end of the permitted season.
1. We allow saltwater fishing on the ocean beach and the surrounding waters of the Broad Sound with the following conditions:
i. We prohibit fishing during closures.
ii. We allow persons using refuge fishing areas access from legal sunrise to legal sunset without a refuge permit. They are, however, subject to entrance fee requirements.
iii. Nelson Island is open to fishing from legal sunrise to legal sunset, except during waterfowl seasons, or other closures. We limit access to the trail, and fishing within 100 feet (30 meters) on either side of the trail at the shoreline of Broad Sound.
iv. The south-facing shoreline of Stage Island is open to fishing. Access to the fishing area is permitted from the refuge's Stage Island Trail, as well as Sandy Point State Reservation, along the shoreline below mean high tide to a point 250 feet (73 meters) beyond the terminus, or most western point, of the
2. We allow walk-on night fishing after legal sunset with the following conditions:
i. Anglers must enter the refuge through the entrance gate, pay an entrance fee, and arrive prior to legal sunset.
ii. We require a valid refuge permit (vehicle sticker issued by the refuge office) and permit fee for walk-on night fishing.
3. We allow anglers to use over-the-sand, surf-fishing vehicles (ORVs) with the following conditions:
i. Anglers must enter the refuge through the entrance gate, pay an entrance fee, and arrive prior to legal sunset.
ii. We require a valid refuge permit and permit fee for persons wishing access to the refuge beach with ORVs as determined in an annual lottery. Drive-on information, as provided in the “Parker River National Wildlife Refuge Drive-on Surf Fishing Information” sheet, will be in effect.
1. You must possess and carry a refuge permit.
2. We allow waterfowl hunting on Saturdays, Sundays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays during regular goose season after September 30.
3. We allow hunter access 1
4. We allow hunters to shoot
5. You may possess no more than 25 shotgun shells while hunting in the field.
6. We allow hunting with dogs.
7. We allow the take of feral hogs incidental to other lawful hunting using legal methods of take.
1. Condition A6 applies.
2. You may only hunt turkey during spring season.
3. We allow hunter access for spring wild turkey season from 1
4. We allow hunter access for small game from
5. We allow hunting with dogs, but we prohibit training of dogs. Raccoon hunting dogs must wear GPS or radio collars.
6. You may only hunt furbearers from
1. Condition A6 applies.
2. You must possess and carry a refuge permit.
1. We allow fishing by boat in navigable waterways but not within any managed refuge units.
2. We allow bank fishing from legal sunrise to legal sunset only at designated sites along the Tittabawassee and Cass Rivers.
1. We prohibit the use of motorized boats. We allow nonmotorized boats in areas open to migratory bird hunting during the migratory bird hunting seasons.
2. For hunting, you may use or possess only approved nontoxic shot shells while in the field, including shot shells used for hunting wild turkey (see § 32.2(k)).
3. We prohibit hunting during the Spring Light Goose Conservation Order.
4. We allow hunting during special State-administered youth seasons.
5. We allow the use of hunting dogs, provided the dog is under the immediate control of the hunter at all times.
6. We allow the use of wheeled, nonmotorized conveyance devices (
7. We prohibit entry onto the refuge earlier than 2 hours before legal shooting time and require hunters to leave the refuge no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. We prohibit shooting from, across, or within 30 feet (9 meters) of a road edge open to public vehicle transportation.
2. Conditions A2, A4, A6, and A7 apply.
The revisions read as follows:
1. We allow hunters to enter and remain in open hunting areas 2 hours before legal sunrise until 2 hours after legal sunset.
2. We allow hunting with the opening of waterfowl season and close hunting at the end of waterfowl season.
3. We allow hunting during a youth-only, special waterfowl hunt in accordance with State regulations.
4. Hunters with a documented mobility disability may reserve an accessible blind in advance by contacting the refuge office.
5. We only allow nonmotorized boats on refuge waters.
1. Conditions A1 and A2 apply.
2. We allow hunting during a youth-only, special pheasant hunt in accordance with State regulations.
1. Hunters may possess only approved nontoxic shot (see § 32.2(k)).
2. We prohibit the use of horses for any purposes.
1. You must possess and carry a refuge Special Use Permit (FWS Form 3-1383-G) to hunt fox and coyotes.
2. Fox and coyote hunters may only use centerfire rifles, rimfire rifles, or shotguns with approved nontoxic shot.
3. Any person hunting or accompanying a hunter must wear a minimum of 400 square inches of hunter orange (fluorescent) material above the waist, visible at all times.
1. We allow portable tree stands, portable blinds, and freestanding elevated platforms to be left on WPAs from August 15 to December 15.
2. You must label portable tree stands, portable blinds, and freestanding elevated platforms with your automated licensing system (ALS) number. The label must be legible from the ground.
3. We only allow the use of archery, muzzleloader (as defined by State regulations), or shotgun on the McNeil Slough WPA and Hammond WPA.
1. We allow the use of portable blinds and stands. You may install stands and blinds no sooner than August 1, and you must remove them by December 15 of each year. We limit each hunter to one stand or blind. The hunter must have their name, address, phone number, and automated licensing system number (ALS) visibly marked on the stand.
2. We prohibit the use of game or trail cameras.
The revisions read as follows:
1. Hunters may enter the designated hunting area 2 hours before legal sunrise and must be back to their vehicle in the process of leaving the refuge 2 hours after legal sunset. Official shooting hours are from
2. We only allow you to unleash dogs used to locate, point, and retrieve upland and small game and migratory birds on the refuge while hunting (see § 26.21(b) of this chapter).
3. We open the refuge to hunting from September 1 through January 31.
4. We allow parking within one vehicle length of the road.
5. We prohibit publicly organized hunts unless authorized under a Special Use Permit (FWS Form 3-1383-C).
6. We only allow floating blinds on Island Lake. We prohibit all boats (including a floating device of any kind) on all other refuge lakes.
1. Conditions A1 through A5 apply.
2. We allow electronic calls for coyote and furbearer hunting.
1. Anglers may enter the refuge 1 hour before legal sunrise and remain until 1 hour after legal sunset.
4. We only allow boating and float tubes on Island Lake. We prohibit use of internal combustion motors for boats on Island Lake.
1. We require the submission of a Big/Upland Game Hunt Application (FWS Form 3-2356). You must possess and carry a signed refuge hunt permit (signed brochure) when hunting. We require hunters to complete a Big Game Harvest Report (FWS Form 3-2359) and return it to the refuge at the conclusion of the hunting season.
2. We allow hunting with muzzleloader and archery equipment. We prohibit hunting with firearms capable of firing cartridge ammunition.
3. We allow hunting in the area defined as those refuge lands situated north and west of the Niobrara River. We allow access to this area only from designated refuge parking areas and the Niobrara River.
4. We prohibit hunting within 200 yards (180 meters) of any public use facility.
5. We allow hunter access from 2 hours before legal sunrise until 2 hours after legal sunset.
6. We allow horses within the wilderness area. We limit horse use to three groups at a time and no more than five horses per group. We prohibit horses from 2 hours after legal sunset until 2 hours before legal sunrise. We require registration at the refuge headquarters prior to horse use during the hunting season. We limit horse access to the wilderness area via the refuge corrals and buffalo bridge.
7. We prohibit leaving tree stands and ground blinds in the same location for more than 7 consecutive days. You must label unattended tree stands, elevated platforms, and ground blinds with your name and address; the label must be legible from the ground. You may put up tree stands, elevated platforms, and ground blinds, but no earlier than opening day of deer season; you must
8. We prohibit hunting during the Nebraska November Firearm Deer Season.
9. We prohibit the use of electronic or photographic trail monitoring devices.
1. Condition B1 applies.
2. Condition A2 applies.
The revisions read as follows:
2. From October 1 to February 1, you may only possess shotshells in quantities of 25 or fewer when in the field.
2. We only allow motorless boats or boats with electric motors on the Upper Lake, Middle Marsh, and Lower Lake, with the exception that we close Upper Lake to all boating from October 1 through February 1.
The following refuge units have been opened for hunting and/or fishing, and are listed in alphabetical order with applicable refuge-specific regulations.
1. We allow hunting within the refuge boundary upon navigable waters from within a boat.
2. We prohibit access to land areas, mud flats, rocks, or marsh grass above mean high tide within the refuge.
3. We prohibit hunters retrieving birds inland of the boundary signs.
1. We require hunters to obtain and possess a refuge deer hunting permit, issued pursuant to an annual selection lottery.
2. We require deer hunters to wear in a visible manner on the head, chest, and back, a minimum of 400 square inches (2,600 square centimeters) of solid-colored, blaze-orange clothing or material.
1. Hunters must remove temporary blinds, boats, and decoys from the refuge at the end of each day's hunt (see § 27.93 of this chapter).
2. We prohibit dog training on the refuge.
3. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot when hunting snipe, crow, and woodcock on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
1. We prohibit night hunting from
2. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot when hunting upland game on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
3. Condition A2 applies.
1. We prohibit night hunting from
2. Condition A2 applies.
3. Hunters must retrieve all species, including coyotes, harvested on the refuge.
4. We allow temporary blinds and tree stands that are clearly marked with the owner's name and address. Temporary blinds and tree stands may be erected no earlier than 14 days prior to the hunting season and must be removed within 14 days after the hunting season.
The revisions read as follows:
1. We allow hunting only on those refuge tracts located west of Route 47 in the Delaware Bay Division and on those tracts north of Route 550 in the Great Cedar Swamp Division. We prohibit hunting on the Two Mile Beach Unit.
2. The common snipe season on the refuge begins with the start of the State early woodcock south zone season and continues through the end of the State common snipe season.
3. You may possess only approved nontoxic shot while hunting woodcock on the refuge (see § 32.2(k)).
4. We allow the use of dogs for hunting; however, the dogs must be under the hunter's control at all times. We prohibit dog training on the refuge.
5. We prohibit falconry.
1. Conditions A1 and A5 apply.
2. We allow rabbit and squirrel hunting following the end of the State's Six-Day Firearm Season for white-tailed deer, until the close of the regular rabbit and squirrel season.
1. We allow hunting of white-tailed deer on all areas of the refuge except for the Two Mile Beach Unit.
2. We allow turkey hunting only on refuge tracts located north of County Route 550 in the Great Cedar Swamp Division. We prohibit turkey hunting on the Two Mile Beach Unit.
3. We prohibit the use of dogs for turkey hunting.
4. You must mark tree stands with owner information (name, address, and phone number). You must remove all deer hunting stands, blinds, and hunting materials at the end of the State deer hunting season. We prohibit permanent stands or blinds.
5. We prohibit fishing for, or possession of, shellfish on refuge lands.
1. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge.
2. We prohibit the use of dogs while hunting.
1. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting deer and turkey on the refuge.
2. We require deer stands to be marked with the hunter's Conservation Identification Number and removed at the end of the last day of the hunting season (no permanent stands).
1. We require hunters to obtain and possess a State permit for the appropriate New Jersey Deer Management Zone at all times while hunting or scouting on the refuge.
2. Hunters must purchase a refuge Deer Hunting Permit, and possess the signed refuge permit at all times while hunting or scouting on the refuge. Youth hunters age 16 years or younger must obtain a permit, but are only charged a processing fee.
3. On scouting days, hunters must access the refuge between legal sunrise and legal sunset. On hunting days, hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and must leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
4. Hunters may put up tree stands beginning on the first scouting day, except on the day of the refuge's youth hunt. They must retrieve their stands by 12 p.m. (noon) on the Sunday after the last day of the hunt. All hunters must put their name and phone number on their stand, and they may have only one stand in the field at any one time. The refuge is not responsible for any stolen stands.
5. We allow hunters to use sleds to slide deer out (no wheeled game carriers allowed) in the Wilderness Area east of Long Hill/New Vernon Road.
6. We prohibit organized deer drives.
7. The refuge hunt season consists of several scouting days, a 1-day youth hunt, and a 4-day regular hunt, usually in late October and early November. Dates are available annually from the refuge website and in the Great Swamp NWR Hunter Information Sheet.
8. Refuge bag limits and hunt areas are determined annually by the refuge. Please refer to the most recent Great Swamp NWR Hunter Information Sheet and Refuge Hunt Map for specific information on annual bag limits and areas open to hunting.
1. We prohibit the taking of frogs and turtles from all nontidal waters and refuge lands.
1. Hunters must purchase a Wallkill River NWR Migratory Bird Hunting Permit from the refuge's hunt permit website. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge. We charge a fee for all hunters except youth age 16 and younger. We provide hunters with refuge hunt regulations, hunt maps, and a Refuge Parking Permit.
2. Hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. Hunters must purchase a Wallkill River NWR Small Game Hunting Permit from the refuge's hunt permit website. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge. We charge a fee for all hunters except youth age 16 and younger. We provide hunters with refuge hunt regulations, hunt maps, and a Refuge Parking Permit.
2. We prohibit night hunting.
3. We prohibit the use of dogs.
4. We prohibit the use of rifles.
5. Hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. Hunters must purchase a Wallkill River NWR Deer, Bear, or Turkey Hunting Permit from the refuge's hunt permit website. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge. We charge a fee for all hunters except youth age 16 and younger. We provide hunters with refuge hunt regulations, hunt maps, and a Refuge Parking Permit.
2. We prohibit organized deer drives.
3. The Armstrong tract is archery only for deer (see hunt map).
4. Hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. Owens Station Crossing is open for catch and release only.
2. Fishing is permitted
3. We prohibit the taking of amphibians and reptiles.
4. We prohibit minnow/bait trapping.
1. In Units A and B, legal hunting hours will run from
2. Hunters may not possess more than 25 shotgun shells while in the field.
3. We allow unleashed hunting and/or retrieving dogs on the refuge when hunters are legally present in areas where hunting is allowed, only if the dogs are under the immediate control of hunters at all time, and only to pursue species legally in season at that time.
4. We prohibit hunting along/on the river within the refuge boundary.
5. At Unit A, in the Cornerstone Marsh Unit, hunters who are disabled (per Mobility-Impaired Certification in the State Hunting Rules and Information pamphlet) are given priority use.
1. Conditions A2 through A5 apply.
2. In the Rio Puerco Unit, legal hunting hours will run from
3. We allow Eurasian collared-dove hunting in all three hunt units. We allow Gambel's quail hunting only in the Rio Puerco Unit as designated on the refuge hunting map.
4. While all State and Federal hunting regulations regarding methods of take, bag limits, and other factors apply to Eurasian collared-dove hunting on the refuge, hunting dates for Eurasian collared-dove are limited to the same dates as the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) Dove South Zone.
The revisions read as follows:
1. Anglers may only surf fish in the Atlantic Ocean from the refuge shoreline in accordance with State regulations.
2. Seasonal closure applies from April 1 to August 31.
1. For hunting of duck, goose, and coot:
i. We allow hunting on Saturday of the New York State Youth Days.
ii. We allow hunting Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays from opening day of regular waterfowl season until the end of the first split. We require proof of successful completion of the New York State Waterfowl Identification Course, the Iroquois Nonresident Waterfowl Identification Course, or a suitable nonresident State Waterfowl Identification Course to hunt in the refuge; all hunters must show proof each time they hunt, in addition to showing their valid hunting license and signed Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Federal Duck Stamp).
iii. We require refuge waterfowl hunting permits.
iv. We only allow hunting from legal starting time until 12 p.m. (noon) and require hunters to check out no later than 1 p.m., and return the Migratory Bird Hunt Report (FWS Form 3-2361) to the waterfowl hunter check station.
v. We require hunters to stay in designated hunting areas, unless actively pursuing downed or crippled birds.
vi. You may only possess approved nontoxic shotshells (see § 32.2(k)) in the field.
vii. We only allow the use of nonmotorized boats.
2. For hunting of rail, gallinule, snipe, and woodcock:
i. We only allow hunting east of Sour Springs Road from October 1 until the opening of regular waterfowl season.
ii. You may only possess approved nontoxic shot in the field (see § 32.2(k)).
1. Small game hunting;
i. We allow hunting from October 1 until the last day of February.
ii. We prohibit the use of raptors to take small game.
iii. Condition A.2.ii applies.
2. Furbearer hunting:
i. Condition B.1.i applies.
ii. We prohibit night hunting.
iii. Condition A.2.ii applies.
1. We allow fishing and frogging from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
2. We prohibit the collection and/or releasing of baitfish.
1. For the regular waterfowl season:
i. We require daily refuge permits (Migratory Bird Hunt Report, FWS Form 3-2361) and reservations; we issue permits to hunters with a reservation for that hunt day. We require you to complete and return your permit by the end of the hunt day.
ii. We allow hunting only on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays during the established refuge season set within the State western zone season. We allow a youth waterfowl hunt during New York State's established youth waterfowl hunt each year.
iii. All hunters with reservations and their hunting companions must check-in at the Route 89 Hunter Check Station area at least 1 hour before legal shooting time or forfeit their reservation. Forfeited reservations become available on a first-come, first-served basis to standby hunters at the Route 89 Hunter Check Station.
iv. We allow motorless boats to hunt waterfowl. We limit hunters to one boat per reservation and one motor vehicle in the hunt area per reservation.
v. We prohibit shooting from any dike or within 50 feet (15.2 meters) of any dike or road, or from within 500 feet (152.4 meters) of the Tschache Pool observation tower.
vi. We require proof of successful completion of the New York State Waterfowl Identification Course, the Montezuma Nonresident Waterfowl Identification Course, or a suitable nonresident State Waterfowl Identification Course to hunt in the refuge; all hunters must show proof each time they hunt, in addition to showing their valid hunting license and signed Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Federal Duck Stamp).
2. For Canada goose and snow goose hunting:
i. We allow hunting of Canada goose during the New York State September (or “early”) season and of snow goose during portions of the New York State snow goose season and portions of the period covered by the Light Goose Conservation Order.
ii. We allow Canada goose and snow goose hunting 7 days per week during the refuge's set hunting dates.
iii. You must possess a valid daily hunt permit card (Migratory Bird Hunt Report, FWS Form 3-2361). We require you to complete and return the daily hunt permit card by the end of the hunt day. Entry onto the refuge to obtain a permit is authorized no earlier than 1
1. You must carry a valid daily hunt permit card (Big/Upland Game Hunt Application, FWS Form 3-2356). We require you to complete and return the daily hunt permit card by the end of the hunt day.
2. We prohibit parking and walking along the Wildlife Drive for the purpose of hunting, unless otherwise posted by refuge personnel.
1. We close Esker Brook and South Spring Pool Trails to hunting before November 1 each year. We close Wildlife Drive to hunting before December 1 each year. We open Seneca Trail and the Refuge Headquarters area during New York State's late archery/muzzleloader season only. We allow a youth white-tailed deer hunt during the State's established youth white-tailed deer hunt each year.
2. You must possess a valid daily hunt permit card (Big/Upland Game Hunt Application, FWS Form 3-2356). We require you to complete and return
3. We allow advanced scouting of the refuge, prior to the hunting season, during a time set by the refuge manager.
4. We allow white-tailed deer hunters to be on the refuge during the period that begins 2 hours before legal sunrise and ends 2 hours after legal sunset.
5. We prohibit parking and walking along the Wildlife Drive for the purpose of hunting, unless otherwise posted by refuge personnel.
1. Hunters must purchase a Shawangunk Grasslands NWR Deer Hunting Permit from the refuge's hunt permit website. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge. We charge a fee for all hunters except youth age 16 and younger. We provide hunters with refuge hunt regulations, hunt maps, and a Refuge Parking Permit.
2. Deer may be taken using archery equipment only.
3. We prohibit organized deer drives.
4. Hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. Hunters must purchase a Wallkill River NWR Migratory Bird Hunting Permit from the refuge's hunt permit website. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge. We charge a fee for all hunters except youth age 16 and younger. We provide hunters with refuge hunt regulations, hunt maps, and a Refuge Parking Permit.
2. Hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. Hunters must purchase a Wallkill River NWR Small Game Hunting Permit from the refuge's hunt permit website. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge. We charge a fee for all hunters except youth age 16 and younger. We provide hunters with refuge hunt regulations, hunt maps, and a Refuge Parking Permit.
2. We prohibit night hunting.
3. We prohibit the use of dogs.
4. We prohibit the use of rifles.
5. Hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. Hunters must purchase a Wallkill River NWR Deer, Bear, or Turkey Hunting Permit from the refuge's hunt permit website. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge. We charge a fee for all hunters except youth age 16 and younger. We provide hunters with refuge hunt regulations, hunt maps, and a Refuge Parking Permit.
2. We prohibit organized deer drives.
3. We prohibit the use of rifles.
4. Hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. Owens Station Crossing is open for catch and release only.
2. Fishing is permitted
3. We prohibit the taking of amphibians and reptiles.
4. We prohibit minnow/bait trapping.
1. We allow archery and shotgun hunting of white-tailed deer within portions of the refuge during specific days between October 1 and January 31.
2. We require refuge permits. We limit the number of deer hunters permitted to hunt on the refuge. We will issue permits by random selection.
3. You must take the specified number of antlerless deer as noted in the refuge hunting regulations before taking an antlered deer.
4. We prohibit driving deer by any means. We define a “drive” as two or more persons involved in the act of chasing, pursuing, disturbing, or otherwise directing deer to make the animal more susceptible to harvest.
5. Hunters assigned to Unit 5 must hunt from portable tree stands and must direct aim away from a public road and/or dwelling.
6. We allow scouting of hunting areas on the refuge only during designated times and days. We prohibit the use of dogs during scouting.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
4. We allow temporary tree stands, blinds, and game cameras for daily use; you must remove them by the end of the day.
1. We allow boats at idle speed only on Arrowwood Lake and Jim Lake from May 1 to September 30 of each fishing year.
3. We allow ice fishing and dark house spearfishing. We allow snowmobiles, ATVs, UTVs, motor vehicles, and fish houses on the ice as conditions allow. We restrict snowmobile, ATV, UTV, and motor vehicle use to unvegetated ice areas, designated roads, and access points.
4. You may use and leave fish houses on the ice overnight until March 15; after March 15, you must remove fish houses from the refuge before leaving for the day. We prohibit leaving fish houses overnight or unattended on refuge uplands or in parking areas.
3. We open the entire refuge to moose hunting except the closed areas listed in C2.
6. We allow ice fishing and dark house spearfishing. We allow snowmobiles, ATVs, UTVs, motor vehicles, and fish houses on the ice as conditions allow. We restrict snowmobile, ATV, UTV, and motor vehicle use to unvegetated ice areas, designated roads, and access points.
1. We open the refuge daily from 5 a.m. to 10 p.m.
2. We prohibit upland game hunting on the portion of the refuge south of Highway 50 during regular deer gun season.
3. We allow upland game hunting on the portion of the refuge north of Highway 50 on the day following the close of the regular deer gun season through the end of the State season.
4. You may use hunting dogs to retrieve upland game. Dogs must be under your direct control at all times.
1. Condition B1 applies.
2. We prohibit entry to the refuge before 12 p.m. (noon) on the first day of the respective archery, gun, or muzzleloader deer hunting season.
3. We prohibit the use of trail cameras.
2. We open the refuge daily from 5 a.m. to 10 p.m.
4. Condition B2 applies.
3. We allow snowmobiles, ATVs, UTVs, motor vehicles, and fish houses on the ice as conditions allow. We restrict snowmobile, ATV, UTV, and motor vehicle use to unvegetated ice areas, designated roads, and access points.
4. We prohibit leaving fish houses overnight or unattended on refuge uplands or in parking areas.
5. Condition B2 applies.
6. We allow hunters on the refuge from 5:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m.
7. We prohibit the use of bicycles or similar vehicles on the refuge.
2. Conditions B5 through B8 apply.
6. We prohibit the use of amphibious vehicles, personal watercraft (PWCs), bicycles, or similar vehicles on the refuge.
7. We allow snowmobiles, ATVs, UTVs, motor vehicles, and fish houses on the ice as conditions allow from Lake Darling Dam north to Carter Dam (Dam 41) for ice fishing. We restrict snowmobile, ATV, UTV, and motor vehicle use to unvegetated ice areas, designated roads, and access points. Consult with the refuge manager or refuge fishing brochure for specific areas.
12. Condition B6 applies.
The following refuge units have been opened to hunting and/or fishing, and are listed in alphabetical order with applicable refuge-specific regulations.
1. You must possess and carry a State-issued permit. All hunters must check in and out at the refuge check station. We require hunters to check out with the State-issued Harvest Card no later than 2 hours after the conclusion of their controlled hunt.
2. We require hunters to remain within their assigned unit.
3. We require hunters to obtain permission from refuge officials before tracking a wounded deer out of the assigned hunting unit.
4. We prohibit hunting or shooting within 150 feet (45.7 meters) of any structure, building, or parking lot.
1. We allow fishing from legal sunrise to legal sunset during designated dates.
2. We allow boats and flotation devices.
1. On controlled waterfowl hunt units, we allow hunting of goose, duck, and coot in accordance with State regulations and subject to the following conditions:
i. You must stop hunting at 12 p.m. (noon) each day.
ii. You must stay in your assigned hunt unit.
iii. You may possess no more than 25 shot shells.
2. On public hunting units, we allow hunting of ducks, geese, rails, gallinule, coot, dove, woodcock, and snipe in accordance with State regulations and subject to the following conditions:
i. We allow refuge access from 1
ii. We allow the use of hunting dogs, provided the dog is under the immediate control of the hunter at all times.
iii. We allow nonmotorized boats in areas open to waterfowl hunting during the waterfowl hunting seasons with the following exception: We allow motorized boats in the Metzger Marsh and Two Rivers units.
1. Conditions A.2.i and A.2.ii apply.
2. We prohibit the use of buckshot for any hunting on the refuge.
1. On controlled deer hunt units, we allow hunting of white-tailed deer only in accordance with State regulations and subject to the following conditions:
i. We require hunters to possess and carry a State-issued permit. You must check in and out at the refuge check station using the State-issued Harvest Card no later than 2 hours after the conclusion of your hunt.
ii. You must remain within your assigned unit.
iii. You must obtain permission from refuge officials before tracking a wounded deer out of your assigned hunting unit.
iv. We prohibit hunting or shooting within 150 feet (45.7 meters) of any structure, building, or parking lot.
2. We allow hunting of white-tailed deer and turkey on designated public hunting units of the refuge in accordance with State regulations and subject to the following conditions:
i. Conditions A.2.i and B2 apply.
ii. We allow only portable deer stands for hunting. We allow only one tree stand per hunter per refuge unit. We allow placement of tree stands after September 1 and require hunters to remove tree stands by March 1 of each year. We require deer stands to be labeled with owner's name and address.
iii. For hunting, you may use or possess only approved nontoxic shot shells while in the field, including shot shells used for hunting wild turkey (see § 32.2(k)).
1. We allow fishing from legal sunrise to legal sunset during designated dates.
2. We allow boats and flotation devices in designated areas.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
2. We prohibit discharge of any firearm within
3. We allow hunting only on Tuesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays, Sundays, and all federally recognized holidays within the State season, with the exception of dove. We only allow hunting for all dove species within the State mourning dove season.
4. On the Memorial Marsh Unit, we allow waterfowl hunting only from numbered field blind sites, and hunters must park their vehicles only at the numbered post corresponding to the numbered field blind site they are using (see § 27.31 of this chapter). Selection of parking sites/numbered posts is on a first-come, first-served basis at parking lot F. We prohibit free-roam hunting or jump shooting, and you must remain within 100 feet (30 m) of the numbered field blind post unless retrieving birds or setting decoys. We allow a maximum of four persons per blind site.
2. We allow hunting from 12 p.m. (noon) to legal sunset.
1. Conditions A1 and A2 apply.
2. We allow hunting under emergency hunt permit or kill permit only (issued by the State).
1. In the controlled waterfowl hunting area, we require a valid Refuge Recreation Pass for all hunters age 16 or older. An adult with a valid Recreation Pass must accompany hunters age 17 or younger who are hunting in the controlled area.
3. Entry hours begin at 4:30 a.m. unless otherwise posted.
1. We allow fishing on Muddy Creek.
2. We allow bank fishing on the Snag Boat Bend Unit only on the Willamette River and Lake Creek.
3. We allow fishing from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
4. We allow anglers to use pole and line, or rod and reel. Anglers must attend their line.
The revisions read as follows:
1. Hunters must purchase a Cherry Valley NWR Migratory Bird Hunting Permit from the refuge's hunt permit website. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge. We charge a fee for all hunters except youth age 16 and younger. We provide hunters with refuge hunt regulations, hunt maps, and a Refuge Parking Permit.
2. Hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and must leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. Hunters must purchase a Cherry Valley NWR Small Game Hunting Permit from the refuge's hunt permit website. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge. We charge a fee for all hunters except youth age 16 and younger. We provide hunters with refuge hunt regulations, hunt maps, and a Refuge Parking Permit.
2. We prohibit night hunting.
3. We prohibit the use of dogs.
4. We prohibit the use of rifles.
5. Hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and must leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. Hunters must purchase a Cherry Valley NWR Deer, Bear, or Wild Turkey Hunting Permit from the refuge's hunt permit website. We require hunters to possess a signed refuge hunt permit at all times while scouting and hunting on the refuge. We charge a fee for all hunters except youth age 16 and younger. We provide hunters with refuge hunt regulations, hunt maps, and a Refuge Parking Permit.
2. We prohibit organized deer drives.
3. Hunters may enter the refuge 2 hours before legal shooting time and must leave no later than 2 hours after legal shooting time.
1. We allow hunting activities on the refuge from September 1 through the end of February. We allow scouting for those same dates, and for the 7 days prior to the start of each season.
2. We only allow nonmotorized boats for waterfowl hunting in permitted areas.
3. We prohibit field possession of migratory game birds in areas of the refuge closed to migratory game bird hunting, unless authorized by the refuge to retrieve downed or crippled animals.
1. We allow woodchuck hunting on the refuge from September 1 through the end of February.
2. We prohibit the use of raptors to take small game.
1. We allow bank fishing only on the Seneca Unit of the refuge. We prohibit wading.
2. We prohibit the use of watercraft for fishing, with the exception of Area 5 where we allow nonmotorized watercraft use. Watercraft must remain in an area from the dike to 3,000 feet (900 meters) upstream.
3. We prohibit the taking of turtle or frog.
4. We prohibit the collecting or releasing of baitfish.
5. We prohibit the taking or possession of shellfish on the refuge.
1. Hunters must possess a valid refuge hunting special use permit and comply with all terms and conditions.
2. Junior hunters age 15 and younger must be accompanied by an adult member of the family (age 18 or older),
The revisions read as follows:
1. We require hunters to submit a Big/Upland Game Hunt Application (FWS Form 3-2356) to be selected to hunt on the refuge.
2. Hunters must mark portable tree stands/blinds with refuge permit number.
3. We prohibit hunting within 100 feet (30 meters) of a refuge trail.
1. We require hunters to submit a Big/Upland Game Hunt Application (FWS Form 3-2356) to be selected to hunt on the refuge.
2. Hunters must mark portable tree stands/blinds with refuge permit number.
3. We prohibit hunting within 100 feet (30 meters) of a refuge trail.
1. Anglers may saltwater fish in the Sakonnet River and Sachuest Bay from the refuge shoreline.
2. Anglers may saltwater fish at Sachuest Beach shoreline from September 16 to March 31.
3. Anglers may night-fish after legal sunset with a refuge permit.
The revisions read as follows:
3. Hunters must check-in at the designated check station and park in the designated area prior to hunting. We require personal identification at check-in.
4. We prohibit entry by boat, and we prohibit hunters to leave by boat to reach other parts of the island.
11. We will close the refuge to the nonhunting public on hunt days.
12. Youth hunters age 15 and younger must remain within sight and normal voice contact of an adult age 21 or older. One adult may supervise no more than one youth hunter.
The revisions read as follows:
1. We seasonally close the refuge sanctuary area to the public from November 15 through March 15.
2. You must possess and carry a signed refuge permit (signed refuge brochure) and comply with all permit provisions and other applicable State and Federal laws.
3. We allow hunting for duck, goose, coot, and merganser from
4. We close mourning dove, woodcock, and snipe seasons during all firearms, youth, and muzzleloader deer seasons.
5. You may use only portable blinds, and you must remove all boats, blinds, and decoys from the refuge by 1 p.m. CST daily.
1. Conditions A1 and A2 apply.
2. We allow hunters to access the refuge no more than 2 hours before legal sunrise to no later than 2 hours after legal sunset, except that raccoon and opossum hunters may access the refuge from legal sunset to legal sunrise.
3. We do not open for spring squirrel season on the refuge.
4. We close squirrel, rabbit, and quail seasons during all firearms, youth, and muzzleloader deer seasons.
5. We close raccoon and opossum seasons on Friday and Saturday nights during all firearms, youth, and
6. We allow horses only on roads open to motorized traffic. We prohibit the use of horses and other animal conveyances from all other areas including fields, woods, and foot trails.
7. You may take coyote and beaver incidental to legal hunting activities with legal methods of take for those hunts.
1. Conditions A1, A2, B2, B6, and B7 apply.
2. You may only participate in the refuge quota hunts with a special quota permit issued through random drawing. Information for permit applications is available at the refuge headquarters.
1. Condition A1 applies.
2. We allow fishing only with pole and line, or rod and reel.
3. We allow the use of bow and arrow, or a gig to take nongame fish on refuge waters.
4. We prohibit taking frog or turtle on the refuge.
1. We seasonally close the sanctuary areas of the refuge to the public from November 15 through March 15.
2. You must possess and carry a signed refuge permit (signed refuge brochure) and comply with all permit provisions and other applicable State and Federal laws.
3. We allow waterfowl hunting only on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. We allow hunting for duck, goose, coot, and merganser from
4. We close mourning dove, woodcock, and snipe seasons during all quota gun and youth deer gun hunts.
5. You may use only portable blinds, and you must remove all boats, blinds, and decoys from the refuge by 1 p.m. CST daily.
1. Conditions A1 and A2 apply.
2. We allow hunters to access the refuge no earlier than 2 hours before legal sunrise to no later than 2 hours after legal sunset, except that raccoon and opossum hunters may access the refuge from legal sunset to legal sunrise.
3. We do not open to spring squirrel season on the refuge.
4. We close all small game hunts during the refuge deer quota and youth gun hunts.
5. We allow horses only on roads open to motorized traffic. We prohibit the use of horses and other animal conveyances from all other areas including fields, woods, and foot trails.
6. You may take coyote and beaver incidental to legal hunting activities with legal methods of take for those hunts.
1. Conditions A1 through A2, B2, B5, and B6 apply.
2. You may only participate in the refuge deer quota hunts with a special quota permit (name and address only) issued through random drawing. Information for permit applications is available at the refuge headquarters.
3. We allow archery deer and turkey hunting on designated areas of the refuge as defined annually in the refuge Public Use Regulations available at the refuge office and in accordance with State regulations.
1. Condition A1 applies.
2. We allow fishing only with pole and line, or rod and reel.
3. We allow use of a bow and arrow, or gig to take nongame fish on refuge waters.
4. We prohibit taking frog or turtle on the refuge.
5. We open Oneal Lake for fishing during a restricted season and for authorized special events. Information on events and season dates is available at the refuge headquarters.
6. We only allow fishing boats of 18 feet (5.5 meters) or less in length on refuge lakes.
7. We allow the use of nonmotorized boats and boats with electric motors only; we prohibit the use of gas and diesel motors on refuge lakes except in the waterfowl hunting area.
1. We seasonally close the refuge to the public from November 15 through March 15.
2. You must possess and carry a signed refuge permit (signed refuge brochure) and comply with all permit provisions and other applicable State and Federal laws.
3. We allow hunters to access the refuge no earlier than 2 hours before legal sunrise to no later than 2 hours after legal sunset, except that raccoon hunters may access the refuge from legal sunset to legal sunrise.
4. We allow horses only on roads opened to motorized traffic. We prohibit the use of horses and other animal conveyances from all other areas including fields, woods, and foot trails.
5. You may take coyote and beaver incidental to legal hunting activities with legal methods of take for those hunts.
6. We do not open for spring squirrel season on the refuge.
1. We open all waters of Lake Isom to fishing only from March 16 through November 14 and from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
2. We allow boats with only electric or outboard motors of 10 horsepower or less.
3. We prohibit taking frog or turtle from refuge waters.
4. We allow fishing only with pole and line, or rod and reel.
5. We allow use of a bow and arrow, or a gig to take nongame fish on refuge waters.
1. We seasonally close the sanctuary area of the refuge and the southern unit of Sunk Lake Public Use Natural Area to the public from November 15 through March 15.
2. You must possess and carry a signed refuge permit (signed refuge brochure) and comply with all permit provisions and other applicable State and Federal laws.
3. We allow hunting for duck, goose, coot, and merganser from
4. We close mourning dove, woodcock, and snipe seasons during all firearms, youth, and muzzleloader deer seasons.
5. You may use only portable blinds, and you must remove all boats, blinds, and decoys from the refuge by 1 p.m. CST daily.
6. We close Sunk Lake Public Use Natural Area to all migratory game bird hunting, and we close the southern unit of Sunk Lake Public Use Natural Area to all hunting.
1. Conditions A1, A2, and A6 apply.
2. We allow hunters to access the refuge no more than 2 hours before legal sunrise to no more than 2 hours after legal sunset, except that raccoon and opossum hunters may access the refuge from legal sunset to legal sunrise.
3. We do not open for spring squirrel season on the refuge.
4. We close squirrel, rabbit, and quail seasons during all firearms, youth, and muzzleloader deer seasons.
5. We close raccoon and opossum seasons on Friday and Saturday nights during all firearms, youth, and muzzleloader deer hunts and seasons, including the Friday night prior to any hunt or season that opens on a Saturday morning.
6. We allow horses only on roads open to motorized traffic. We prohibit the use of horses and other animal conveyances from all other areas including fields, woods, and foot trails.
7. You may take coyote and beaver incidental to legal hunting activities with legal methods of take for those hunts.
1. Conditions A1, A2, A6, B2, B6, and B7 apply.
2. You may participate in the refuge quota hunts only with a special quota permit (name and address only) issued through random drawing. Information for permit applications is available at the refuge headquarters.
3. We allow archery deer hunting only on the northern unit of Sunk Lake Public Use Natural Area.
1. We allow fishing only from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
2. We allow fishing only with pole and line, or rod and reel.
3. We allow use of a bow and arrow, or a gig to take nongame fish on refuge waters.
4. We prohibit taking frog or turtle on the refuge.
5. We seasonally close the sanctuary area of the refuge and the southern unit of Sunk Lake Public Use Natural Area to the public from November 15 through March 15.
6. We allow the use of only nonmotorized boats and boats with electric motors on Sunk Lake Public Use Natural Area.
1. We seasonally close the refuge to the public from November 15 through March 15.
2. You must possess and carry a signed refuge permit (signed refuge brochure) and comply with all permit provisions and other applicable State and Federal law.
3. We allow hunters to access the refuge no earlier than 2 hours before legal sunrise to no later than 2 hours after legal sunset, except that raccoon hunters may access the refuge from legal sunset to legal sunrise.
4. We allow horses only on roads open to motorized traffic. We prohibit the use of horses and other animal conveyances from all other areas including fields, woods, and foot trails.
5. You may take coyote and beaver incidental to legal hunting activities with legal methods of take for those hunts.
6. We do not open for spring squirrel season on the refuge.
1. Conditions B1 through B5 apply.
2. You may participate in the refuge firearms deer and turkey quota hunts only with a special quota permit (name and address only) issued through random drawing. Information for permit applications is available at the refuge headquarters.
1. We allow access to the Long Point Unit (north of Upper Blue Basin) for fishing from March 16 through November 14, and the Grassy Island Unit (south of Upper Blue Basin) for fishing from February 1 through November 14.
2. We allow fishing on the refuge from legal sunrise to legal sunset.
3. We prohibit taking of frog or turtle on the refuge.
4. We prohibit airboats, hovercraft, or personal watercraft (
1. You must carry a current signed refuge hunting permit (signed brochure—Hunting Regulations) while waterfowl hunting on all refuge hunt units.
2. Hunters age 17 and younger must be under the direct supervision of an adult age 18 or older.
3. We close refuge hunt units on Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year's Day.
4. We prohibit the use of airboats, marsh buggies, ATVs (see § 27.31(f) of this chapter), and personal watercraft.
5. On inland waters of refuge hunt areas open to motorized boats, we restrict the operation of motorized boats to lakes, ponds, ditches, and other waterways. We prohibit the operation of motorized boats on or through emergent wetland vegetation.
6. On inland waters of the refuge hunt areas open to motorized boats, we restrict the use of boats to those
7. For waterfowl hunting, we allow hunting in portions of the East Unit on specified days during the regular waterfowl seasons. We prohibit motorized boats launching from the East Unit.
8. We allow hunting in portions of the Middleton Tract and the Pace Tract during early teal season and regular waterfowl season during designated dates and on designated areas of the refuge.
9. Light goose conservation order will be concurrent with State regulations in designated areas and on designated dates.
10. We allow dove hunting in designated areas and concurrent with State regulations.
1. We allow fishing and crabbing on shoreline areas on East Galveston Bay, along East Bay Bayou on the East Bay Bayou Tract, along West Line Road to the southern end of Shoveler Pond, along the canal from the Oyster Bayou Boat Ramp to the southwest corner of Shoveler Pond, and along the banks of Shoveler Pond.
2. We allow fishing and crabbing only with pole and line, rod and reel, or handheld line. We prohibit the use of any method not expressly allowed, including trotlines, setlines, jug lines, limb lines, bows and arrows, gigs, spears, or crab traps.
3. We allow cast netting for bait for personal use along waterways in areas open to the public and along public roads.
4. We prohibit boats and other floatation devices on inland waters. You may launch motorized boats in East Bay at the East Bay Boat Ramp on Westline Road and at the Oyster Bayou Boat Ramp (boat canal). We prohibit the launching of airboats or personal watercraft on the refuge. You may launch nonmotorized boats only along East Bay Bayou and along the shoreline of East Galveston Bay.
5. We prohibit fishing from or mooring to water control structures.
The revisions read as follows:
3. You must release unharmed any of the four federally endangered fish if caught (razorback sucker, Colorado pike minnow, humpback chub, or bonytail chub).
The following refuge units have been opened for hunting and/or fishing, and are listed in alphabetical order with applicable refuge-specific regulations.
1. Waterfowl: For the hunting of goose, brant, duck, merganser, and coot, we divide the refuge into six discrete waterfowl hunting units: The Delta Lakeshore Area, the Maquam Shore Area, the Saxes Pothole/Creek and Shad Island Area, the Junior Waterfowl Hunting Area (including Long Marsh Bay, Patrick Marsh, and Charcoal Creek), the Long Marsh Channel and Metcalfe Island Area, and the Maquam Swamp Area. See the Missisquoi National Wildlife Refuge Migratory Game Bird Hunting Map and Regulations for further information. Conditions for each area are as follows:
i. Delta Lakeshore Area, which includes lakeshore areas from Shad Island to the south side of Martindale Point but does not include Saxes Pothole/Creek and Shad Island Pothole, is open to migratory bird hunting with the following special requirements:
a. We do not require a refuge permit to hunt or scout in this area.
b. We prohibit blind staking, permanent blinds, and unattended decoys.
ii. Maquam Shore Area encompasses a 30-acre area along the lakeshore of Maquam Bay and is bounded by private land on the west and a Vermont wildlife management area on the east. We do not require a refuge permit to hunt or scout in this area.
iii. Saxes Pothole/Creek and Shad Island Pothole, which encompass Saxes Creek, Saxes Pothole, and Shad Island Pothole, are open to migratory bird hunting with the following special requirements:
a. This is a controlled hunting area. We require a refuge permit to hunt in this area.
b. Each hunting party must possess and carry a permit for the specific zone on the specific day they are hunting in this area. Permits are not transferable.
c. You must use a retrieving dog.
iv. Junior Waterfowl Hunting Area, which encompasses Long Marsh Bay, Patrick Marsh, and that portion of Charcoal Creek south of Vermont Route 78, is open to migratory bird hunting with the following special requirements:
a. This is a controlled hunting area. We require a refuge permit to hunt in this area.
b. Each junior hunter must possess and carry a permit for the assigned blind site and day. On Mentor Day, mentors must also possess and carry this permit for the assigned blind site. Each adult hunting party must possess and carry a permit for the blind site and day they are hunting. Permits are not transferable.
c. Shooting hours end at 11 a.m.
v. Long Marsh Channel and Metcalfe Island, which encompass the Metcalfe Island Pothole and Long Marsh Channel, are open to migratory bird hunting with the following special requirements:
a. This is a controlled hunting area. We require a refuge permit to hunt in this area.
b. We will limit hunting to Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays throughout the waterfowl hunting season for duck.
c. Each hunting party must possess and carry a permit for the blind on the specific day they are hunting in this area. Permits are not transferable.
d. Shooting hours end at 11 a.m.
e. You must use a retrieving dog.
f. We will close this area to waterfowl hunting during split seasons when geese are the only waterfowl that hunters may legally take.
vi. Maquam Swamp Area encompasses about 200 acres (80 hectares) west of the Central Vermont Railroad and south of Coleman's inholding, and is open to migratory bird hunting with the following special requirements:
a. We prohibit blind staking, permanent blinds, or unattended decoys.
b. You must use a retrieving dog.
2. Other migratory birds (including woodcock, snipe and crow): You may hunt woodcock and snipe in the Delta Lakeshore Waterfowl Hunting Area, excluding the Saxe's Creek/Pothole and Shad Island Pothole controlled areas and Maquam Swamp area. We do not require a refuge permit to hunt or scout in these areas.
3. On the Eagle Point Unit, we allow hunting of migratory birds in accordance with State regulations.
1. You must obtain a permit at refuge headquarters prior to hunting, and you must hold a valid State hunting license. We will collect a fee for each permit we issue. The permit applies for the calendar year of issue.
2. We only allow shotguns or muzzleloaders on open areas east of the Missisquoi River and on Shad Island.
3. You must use approved nontoxic shot for the shotgun hunting of all upland game species (see § 32.2(k)).
4. We prohibit hunting from the end of snowshoe hare and rabbit season through September 1.
5. On the Eagle Point Unit, we allow hunting in accordance with State regulations; conditions B1 through B4 do not apply on the Eagle Point Unit.
1. We allow hunting of white-tailed deer.
2. You must obtain a permit at refuge headquarters prior to hunting, and you must hold a valid State hunting license.
3. We only allow shotguns, muzzleloaders, or archery equipment on open areas east and north of Vermont Route 78. We prohibit rifles in these areas at any time.
4. You may use portable tree stands in accordance with State regulations guiding their use on State Wildlife Management Areas with the following exception: We allow only one tree stand or ground blind for each big game/upland game permit we issue.
5. On the Eagle Point Unit, we allow hunting in accordance with State regulations and subject to the following conditions:
i. You may use portable tree stands in accordance with State regulations guiding their use on State Wildlife Management Areas. We prohibit permanent stands and blinds.
ii. We allow training of hunting dogs during the regular hunting seasons as regulated by the State. Dog training outside the regular hunting seasons (June 1 to July 31) will be permitted by Special Use Permit (Permit Application Form: National Wildlife Refuge System General Special Use, FWS Form 3-1383-G) only.
iii. You must request a permit in writing from the refuge manager, Missisquoi National Wildlife Refuge.
1. We allow sport fishing by boat (including bow fishing) and ice fishing in the west branch, east branch, and main channel of the Missisquoi River; Dead Creek; and shallow water areas of the Missisquoi River delta from Goose Bay to Charcoal Creek (north of Vermont Route 78) with the following exceptions:
i. We close the following areas from ice out to July 15—Goose Bay, Saxes Creek and Pothole, Metcalfe Island Pothole, Long Marsh Channel, and Clark Marsh.
ii. We close the following areas from Labor Day to December 31—Long Marsh Bay and Long Marsh Channel.
2. We allow bank fishing along Charcoal Creek where it passes under Route 78, and along the shoreline of the Missisquoi River from refuge headquarters to Mac's Bend boat launch. Bank fishing is accessible only by foot along the Missisquoi River from Louie's Landing to Mac's Bend.
3. We prohibit taking fish with firearms within refuge boundaries.
4. We allow boat launching from Louie's Landing year-round. We allow boat launching from Mac's Bend boat launch area from September through November inclusive.
1. We allow disabled hunters to hunt from a vehicle on refuge roads if the hunter possesses a State-issued disabled hunting license in accordance with State regulations and a Special Use Permit (FWS Form 3-1383-G) issued by the Refuge Manager.
2. To monitor and mitigate potential disturbances to wildlife and neighboring landowners, we require hunters hunting at night to possess a Special Use Permit (FWS Form 3-1383-G) issued by the Refuge Manager.
1. We allow disabled hunters to hunt from a vehicle on refuge roads if the hunter possesses a State-issued disabled hunting license in accordance with State regulations and a Special Use Permit (FWS Form 3-1383-G) issued by the Refuge Manager.
2. You may use portable tree stands and blinds in accordance with State regulations guiding their use on State Wildlife Management Areas, and you must remove them by the end of the final deer season.
3. Moose may be retrieved at the Nulhegan Basin Division by a commercial moose hauler, if the hauler possesses a Special Use Permit (FWS Form 3-1383-C) issued by the Refuge Manager.
The revisions read as follows:
1. We prohibit use of dogs.
2. We allow scouting on designated days prior to the start of each refuge hunt period. Hunters may enter the hunt zones on foot, on bicycle, or through transportation provided by the refuge only.
3. Hunters may go to Hunt Zone 1 (Long Island) only by hand-launched watercraft (canoe, punt, rowboat, and similar watercraft) from the canoe launch at refuge headquarters. We prohibit use of trailers.
4. We prohibit hunting or discharging of firearms within designated Safety Zones. We prohibit retrieval of wounded game from a “No Hunting Area” or “Safety Zone” without the consent of the refuge employee on duty at the check station.
5. We prohibit use of tree stands, except on Long Island (Hunt Zone 1).
1. We close all areas within the hunting zones, as well as the oceanfront, to fishing, crabbing, and clamming during the annual refuge white-tailed deer and feral hog hunt.
2. You may surf fish, crab, and clam south of the refuge's beach access ramp. We allow night surf fishing by Special Use Permit (FWS Form 3-1383-G) in this area in accordance with dates and times designated on the permit.
3. For sport fishing in D Pool:
i. We only allow fishing from the docks or banks in D Pool. We prohibit boats, canoes, or kayaks on D Pool and all other refuge pools and impoundments.
ii. We prohibit live minnows or other live bait fish.
iii. We prohibit hooks other than barbless or flattened.
iv. You must catch and release all freshwater game fish. The daily creel limit for D Pool for other species is a maximum combination of any 10 nongame fish.
v. Parking for nonambulatory visitors only is available adjacent to the dock at D Pool.
1. We allow holders of a refuge hunt permit (Quota Deer Hunt Application, FWS Form 3-2354) to access areas of the refuge typically closed to the nonhunting public. All occupants of a vehicle or hunt party must possess a refuge hunt permit and be actively engaged in hunting. We allow an exception to exist for those persons aiding a disabled person who possesses a valid State-issued Commonwealth of Virginia Disabled Resident Lifetime License or Commonwealth of Virginia Resident Disabled Veteran's Lifetime License.
2. You may not hunt within 100 feet (30.5 meters) of any building.
3. We prohibit deer drives. We define a “drive” as four or more persons involved in the act of chasing, pursuing, disturbing, or otherwise directing deer so as to make the animal more susceptible to harvest.
4. You may not hunt, discharge a firearm, or nock an arrow or crossbow bolt within 50 feet (15.2 meters) of the centerline of any road, whether improved or unimproved, or paved trail.
1. You may not wade or launch a vessel in Swan's Cove Impoundment.
1. We allow holders of a refuge hunt permit (Quota Deer Hunt Application, FWS Form 3-2354) to access areas of the refuge typically closed to the nonhunting public. All occupants of a vehicle or hunt party must possess a refuge hunt permit and be actively engaged in hunting. We allow an exception to exist for those persons aiding a disabled person who possesses a valid State-issued Commonwealth of Virginia Disabled Resident Lifetime License or Commonwealth of Virginia Resident Disabled Veteran's Lifetime License.
2. You must sign in before entering the hunt zones and sign out upon leaving the zone.
3. We prohibit deer drives. We define a “drive” as four or more persons involved in the act of chasing, pursuing, disturbing, or otherwise directing deer so as to make the animal more susceptible to harvest.
4. We prohibit nocked arrows or loaded firearms outside of the designated hunting areas.
5. We only allow shotguns loaded with buckshot during the firearm season.
1. We allow fishing in Lake Drummond from a boat and from the piers at Washington Ditch and Interior Ditch.
1. We require hunters to possess and carry a refuge hunting permit.
2. We require persons who wish to hunt during the refuge's archery season to obtain a refuge hunting permit through a lottery administered by the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. We notify successful applicants by mail or email, and if we receive the hunting fee by the date identified in the mailing, we mail refuge hunting permits to successful applicants.
3. We prohibit dogs.
4. We require that hunters during firearms and muzzleloader seasons remain within 100 feet (30 meters) of their assigned stand while hunting.
5. We require that hunters using a muzzleloader must hunt from a stand elevated 10 feet (3 meters) or more above the ground.
2. Hunters must certify/qualify weapons and ammunition and view the orientation session online prior to issuance of a permit. Consult the refuge office or website for certification and orientation information and procedures.
1. You must possess and carry a refuge permit.
2. We select hunters by lottery. Consult the refuge office or website for application information and procedures.
3. Hunters must certify/qualify weapons and ammunition and view an orientation session online prior to issuance of a permit. Consult the refuge office or website for certification and orientation information and procedures.
1. We require hunters to possess and carry a refuge hunting permit (see condition A2) along with their State hunting license and stamps, while hunting migratory game birds on the refuge. We open the Cow Island unit of the refuge only to migratory game bird hunting. We close all other areas of the refuge to public entry.
1. We require big game hunters to obtain a permit through a lottery administered by the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. We require a fee to obtain a refuge hunting permit. We will notify successful applicants by mail or email, and if we receive the hunting fee by the date identified in the mailing, we will mail refuge hunting permits to successful applicants.
2. We prohibit the use of “deer drives,” defined as individual or group efforts intended to “push” or “jump” deer for the purposes of hunting.
3. We allow shotgun hunting on designated days as indicated on refuge hunting permits, in the State hunting guide, and on the refuge website,
4. We prohibit dogs.
5. We require hunters to dock their boats at designated locations on the refuge.
1. We require big game hunters to obtain a permit. Please contact the refuge on how to obtain a permit.
2. We prohibit dogs.
The revisions read as follows:
1. We require each hunter to possess and carry a signed refuge hunting permit.
2. We prohibit camping. We prohibit overnight parking except by Special Use Permit (FWS Form 3-1383-G) on Forest Road 80.
3. We allow the use of dogs for hunting migratory game birds. We prohibit more than 2 dogs per hunter. We require all dogs to wear a collar displaying the owner's name, address, and telephone number.
4. We prohibit dog training except during legal hunting seasons.
1. Conditions A1, A3, and A4 apply.
4. You may use dogs for hunting upland game species. We prohibit more than six dogs per hunting party. All dogs must wear a collar displaying the owner's name, address, and telephone number.
5. We prohibit the hunting of upland game species between March 1 and August 31.
1. Conditions A1, A3, A4, and B3 apply.
2. We prohibit permanent tree stands, but we allow use of temporary tree stands. You must clearly print your name and address in an easily read area on the stand while the stand is affixed to the tree. You must remove tree stands (see § 27.93 of this chapter) at the end of the deer season.
3. We prohibit hunting for turkey with a rifle. You must use a shotgun or muzzleloader with a shot size of #4 or smaller.
4. We allow dogs for hunting black bear during the gun season. We prohibit more than six dogs per hunting party. All dogs must wear a collar displaying
1. We require each hunter to possess and carry a signed refuge hunting permit; the free refuge hunting permit is available to download from the refuge website and at the refuge headquarters.
2. The refuge opens 1 hour before legal sunrise and closes 1 hour after legal sunset, including parking areas.
3. We only allow dogs to locate, point, and retrieve when hunting for migratory game birds.
1. Conditions A1 and A2 apply.
2. We prohibit the use of pursuit dogs for hunting rabbit or squirrel.
3. We prohibit the use of rifles, muzzleloaders, or pistols for hunting rabbit or squirrel.
We allow hunting of white-tailed deer only by archery on designated areas of the refuge (Pennsylvania: Phillis Island, Georgetown Island; West Virginia: Paden Island, Captina Island, Captina Mainland, Fish Creek Island, Williamson Island, Witten Towhead, Wells Island, Mill Creek Island, Grandview Island, Grape/Bat Island, zoned area of Middle Island, Broadback Island, Buckley Island, Buckley Mainland, Muskingum Island, Neal Island, Buffington Island, Letart Island; and Kentucky: Manchester 1 Island, Manchester 2 Island) in accordance with State regulations and subject to the following conditions:
1. Conditions A1 and A2 apply.
2. We prohibit organized deer drives by two or more individuals. We define a deer drive as the act of chasing, pursuing, disturbing, or otherwise directing deer so as to make the animals more susceptible to harvest.
3. We only allow the use of temporary tree stands and blinds, which must be removed at the end of each hunt day. All tree stands and blinds must have the name and address of the owner clearly printed in an easily readable area.
1. Condition A2 applies.
2. We prohibit trotlines (setlines) and turtle lines.
The revisions read as follows:
Refer to § 32.32 Illinois for regulations.
1. We allow hunting of ducks, mergansers, geese, coots, mourning dove, sora, Virginia rail, woodcock, snipe, and crow on refuge lands north of the main channel of the Trempealeau River and north of State Highway 35/54, subject to the following conditions:
i. We allow only the use of portable or temporary blinds.
ii. We allow the use of hunting dogs for bird hunting, provided the dog is under the immediate control of the hunter at all times.
2. We allow hunting of ducks, mergansers, geese, and coots on refuge lands south of the main channel of the Trempealeau River and south of State Highway 35/54, subject to the following condition: We require a refuge permit.
1. We prohibit the use of rifles for deer hunting on all refuge land south of the main channel of the Trempealeau River and south of State Highway 35/54.
2. On refuge land north of the main channel of the Trempealeau River and north of State Highway 35/54, we allow white-tailed deer hunting during the state archery, muzzleloader, and firearms seasons. We allow hunting during the Youth Gun Deer Hunt and the Gun Hunt for Hunters with Disabilities in accordance with State regulations.
3. On refuge land south of the main channel of the Trempealeau River and south of State Highway 35/54, we allow white-tailed deer hunting only by refuge permit.
1. We allow only boats propelled by hand or electric motors on refuge pools. We do not prohibit the possession of other watercraft motors, only their use.
2. We prohibit harvest of turtle.
3. We prohibit night-lighting, archery, spearing, or netting of fish.
The revisions read as follows:
1. We prohibit hunting in areas of the refuge indicated on the Cokeville Meadows National Wildlife Refuge Hunting Brochure and marked by signs as closed to all hunting or closed to migratory bird hunting.
1. Conditions A1, A3, and A4 apply.
3. Red fox, raccoon, and striped skunk may be taken on the refuge by licensed migratory bird, big game, or upland/small game hunters from September 1 until the end of the last open big game, upland bird, or small game season. Red fox, raccoon, or striped skunk that are harvested must be taken into possession and removed from the refuge.
1. Conditions A1, A3, and A4 apply.
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR